tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-67934247866789236232014-10-07T00:40:05.635-04:00The National Championship IssuePerspectives on College FootballEd Gunthernoreply@blogger.comBlogger683125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-15642366822344885392012-02-12T12:43:00.001-05:002012-02-12T12:44:56.026-05:00Final ThoughtsBack when I started this site in 2007, my only thought was to present a comparison of the different versions of the BCS, since the system went through 5 changes in its first 8 seasons. I was curious to see what the national championship could have been if a few small variables had changed, and <a STYLE="text-decoration:none" href="http://thenationalchampionshipissue.blogspot.com/2006/11/bcs-conclusions.html"><font color="940F04">my conclusion</font></a> was that "It's rather ironic that the most effective version of the BCS (the most recent one) is the one that most approximates the system of polls that the BCS was originally designed to replace, making you wonder whether it was all worth it."
<p>That central question, whether all the fuss about the national championship issue is worth it, has remained the unchanged focus of this website, like the BCS formula that's been used the last eight seasons. But after attempting to look at a lot of different college football related issues from different perspectives, my answers to that question have grown more complex and involved, just as the sport itself has in the few years since that first post.
<p>Back in 2007, I was vehemently anti-playoff. Not that I liked the BCS, but I felt, and still feel at times, that the negatives of a playoff outweighed the positives. About the time that I created a series of posts attempting to explore all sides of <a STYLE="text-decoration:none" href="http://thenationalchampionshipissue.blogspot.com/2009/05/arguments-for-against-di-college.html"><font color="940F04">the playoff debate</font></a> in spring 2009, my thoughts on the issue started to change. But not in the way you might think. That exercise did help me to see some of the positives of a playoff, and my stance against one has definitely softened. I admit that I would thoroughly enjoy some semi-final matchups between four of the top teams in the country, and how the playoff-creation process itself plays out is still fascinating to me. But while I've come to see that there are better possible ways to handle the national championship issue, I've also come to firmly believe that it's not worth it. And that's the main reason that I'm putting this site to rest - I believe that the national championship issue and all that it entails has become too much of the focus of college football in recent years and is overshadowing many of the things that make the sport so unique and enjoyable.
<p>At <a STYLE="text-decoration:none" href="http://thenationalchampionshipissue.blogspot.com/2010/09/2010-kickoff-just-games-maam-just-games.html"><font color="940F04">the beginning of the 2010 season</font></a>, when I tried to detach my first week of viewing games from the overall seasonal ramifications, I had no idea I'd never really get back into the game, so to speak. But I must say, it has made watching the last two seasons more enjoyable, focusing on just the games, not wondering nearly as much how the outcome was going to impact teams from other conferences and the overall order of things. That doesn't mean I'm completely removed from the big picture. I still firmly believe that <a STYLE="text-decoration:none" href="http://thenationalchampionshipissue.blogspot.com/2009/09/on-expectations.html"><font color="940F04">expectations of national-scene success</font></a> are way too high for most teams, that what might help most in terms of figuring out ranking positions is getting rid of the cupcake games (even though <a STYLE="text-decoration:none" href="http://thenationalchampionshipissue.blogspot.com/2009/10/curse-of-cupcake-games.html"><font color="940F04">they're a necessary evil</font></a>), and that an <a STYLE="text-decoration:none" href="http://thenationalchampionshipissue.blogspot.com/2007/11/evolved-playoff.html"><font color="940F04">evolved playoff</font></a>, while unconventional, strikes the perfect balance towards finding both a definitive and overall best playoff champion.
<p>But I've said it before, moreso in the last two seasons, that there's more to college football than just the national championship issue. So while I'll still pop up around the blogosphere and continue to follow and write thoughts on the sport, this site has served its purpose. I hope its ending does too - it just seems appropriate and fitting.
<p>Thanks for reading.
<p>- EdEd Gunthernoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-25950252676432755702012-01-18T20:05:00.003-05:002012-01-19T09:43:28.907-05:00Bowls & TV Ratings, 2012 edition<style TYPE="text/css">
.bluetext { color:#000096;
}
.redtext { color:#960000;
}
.whitetext { color:#FFFFFF;
}
.blacktext { color:#000000;
}
.gray { background-color:#AAAAAA;
}
.red4 { background-color:#D20000;
}
.red3 { background-color:#DA5252;
}
.red2 { background-color:#EE8282;
}
.red1 { background-color:#F5C3C3;
}
.red15 { background-color:#D5C3C3;
}
.red0 { background-color:#FBEBEB;
}
.blue0 { background-color:#E3F2F9;
}
.blue1 { background-color:#C4E0EE;
}
.blue2 { background-color:#9EC6E2;
}
.blue3 { background-color:#479ACD;
}
.blue4 { background-color:#2B5E8D;
}
.backgroundtest { background-color: #FFD861;
}
</style>
<p>Alright, we've done this before but it's been a couple of years: Let's take a quick look at the television ratings for all these bowls and see if we can't make something of them. Everyone knows that the ratings are down, but by how much? And for all bowls? Or just some?
<p>The first area we'll look at are the BCS bowls and how they've fared over the years. The chart below shows the five BCS bowls - the Rose, Orange, Fiesta, Sugar, and National Championship. For the first 8 years when one of those bowls doubled as the national championship, the blue of the championship game is marked with the color of the game that hosted it.
<p><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-laz8D4k8fWM/TxdsnpXMNUI/AAAAAAAABgY/6MYuCoDHQMs/s1600/bowls2012.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 600px; height: 450px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-laz8D4k8fWM/TxdsnpXMNUI/AAAAAAAABgY/6MYuCoDHQMs/s800/bowls2012.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5699143281834472770" /></a>
<p>The only bowl that hasn't been down over the last few seasons is the Fiesta, and that's mainly due to their #3 vs #4 matchup in 2012 (and even the ratings for that weren't as high as some of the golden years in the 2000's.) The slope don't lie - things aren't looking good for the BCS bowls, which is why there's going to be a shakeup soon. (Let's put it another way - this past year the sum of the ratings for the BCS bowl games was a 44.5 share. The only other years lower than that were 2001 and 2004 - and those years only had 4 BCS games, not 5.)
<p>What about the other, non-BCS bowls? Have they suffered the same decline over the past two seasons?
<p>The table below lists all of the bowls from 2002-2011, their ratings each year, how 2011 stacked up to their average from 2002-2009, and whether or not they did better (blue) or worse (red) than previous season's rating.
<p><table class="no-arrow" align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=12 class="font125 white">Bowl Ratings 2002-2011 (by share)
<tr>
<th col width="160" class="sortable">Bowl
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2002
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2003
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2004
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2005
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2006
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2007
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2008
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2009
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2010
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2011
<th col width="60" class="sortable">2011 to Avg
<tr>
<td>Texas
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>1.4
<td class="accred">0.3
<td>0.3
<td class="pac10blue">2.1
<td class="pac10blue">2.7
<td>2.7
<td class="pac10blue">1.7
<tr>
<td>Outback
<td>4.2
<td class="pac10blue">4.5
<td class="accred">3.6
<td class="accred">2.4
<td class="pac10blue">4.4
<td class="accred">3.4
<td class="accred">3.1
<td class="pac10blue">3.5
<td class="pac10blue">7.1
<td class="accred">5.1
<td class="pac10blue">1.5
<tr>
<td>Cotton
<td>4.2
<td class="pac10blue">4.5
<td class="accred">2.6
<td class="pac10blue">3.7
<td>3.7
<td class="accred">3.5
<td class="pac10blue">4.4
<td class="pac10blue">4.5
<td class="pac10blue">5.8
<td class="accred">5.0
<td class="pac10blue">1.1
<tr>
<td>Insight
<td>3.4
<td class="accred">3.1
<td class="accred">2.9
<td class="pac10blue">3.3
<td class="accred">0.9
<td class="accred">0.4
<td class="pac10blue">1.2
<td class="accred">0.4
<td class="pac10blue">2.2
<td class="pac10blue">3.0
<td class="pac10blue">1.1
<tr>
<td>Champs Sports
<td>1.6
<td class="pac10blue">2.1
<td class="accred">1.9
<td class="pac10blue">2.2
<td class="pac10blue">3.0
<td class="pac10blue">3.7
<td class="pac10blue">5.2
<td class="accred">3.9
<td class="accred">2.1
<td class="pac10blue">3.3
<td class="pac10blue">0.4
<tr>
<td>New Orleans
<td>1.4
<td class="pac10blue">1.5
<td class="accred">1.4
<td class="pac10blue">1.7
<td class="accred">1.3
<td class="pac10blue">1.6
<td class="accred">0.8
<td class="accred">0.7
<td class="pac10blue">1.3
<td class="pac10blue">1.6
<td class="pac10blue">0.3
<tr>
<td>Music City
<td>2.3
<td class="pac10blue">2.4
<td class="pac10blue">3.1
<td class="accred">2.1
<td class="pac10blue">2.2
<td class="pac10blue">4.0
<td class="accred">2.8
<td class="accred">1.7
<td class="pac10blue">4.2
<td class="accred">2.7
<td class="pac10blue">0.1
<tr>
<td>Beef'O'Brady's
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>1.3
<td class="pac10blue">1.6
<td class="pac10blue">2.0
<td class="accred">1.5
<td class="pac10blue">0.0
<tr>
<td>Poinsettia
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>0.9
<td class="pac10blue">1.5
<td class="pac10blue">2.0
<td class="pac10blue">3.7
<td class="accred">2.4
<td class="accred">2.3
<td class="accred">2.1
<td class="accred">0.0
<tr>
<td>Alamo
<td>4.4
<td class="accred">4.2
<td>4.2
<td class="pac10blue">5.4
<td class="pac10blue">6.0
<td class="accred">2.7
<td class="pac10blue">4.6
<td class="pac10blue">4.8
<td class="accred">2.8
<td class="pac10blue">4.4
<td class="accred">-0.1
<tr>
<td>Sun
<td>3.6
<td class="accred">3.5
<td class="accred">2.8
<td class="accred">2.6
<td class="accred">2.4
<td class="accred">2.3
<td class="accred">2.2
<td class="pac10blue">3.3
<td class="accred">3.0
<td class="accred">2.7
<td class="accred">-0.1
<tr>
<td>Famous Potato
<td>1.8
<td class="pac10blue">2.1
<td class="accred">1.7
<td class="pac10blue">2.3
<td class="accred">1.6
<td class="accred">0.8
<td class="pac10blue">2.4
<td class="accred">2.1
<td class="accred">1.8
<td class="accred">1.7
<td class="accred">-0.2
<tr>
<td>Las Vegas
<td>2.9
<td class="accred">1.8
<td class="pac10blue">1.9
<td class="pac10blue">2.4
<td class="accred">2.0
<td class="pac10blue">2.5
<td>2.5
<td class="accred">2.2
<td class="pac10blue">3.3
<td class="accred">2.1
<td class="accred">-0.2
<tr>
<td>BBVA Compass
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>1.7
<td class="pac10blue">2.3
<td class="accred">2.0
<td class="accred">1.6
<td class="pac10blue">2.2
<td class="accred">1.5
<td class="accred">-0.4
<tr>
<td>Military
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>2.2
<td class="accred">1.9
<td class="accred">1.5
<td>1.5
<td class="accred">-0.6
<tr>
<td>Little Caesars
<td>1.9
<td class="pac10blue">2.3
<td class="accred">1.7
<td class="pac10blue">2.2
<td class="accred">2.1
<td class="pac10blue">2.7
<td class="accred">2.5
<td class="pac10blue">2.6
<td class="accred">1.4
<td class="pac10blue">1.7
<td class="accred">-0.6
<tr>
<td>Armed Forces
<td>
<td>2.8
<td class="accred">1.6
<td class="pac10blue">2.3
<td class="accred">2.0
<td>2.0
<td class="accred">1.7
<td class="accred">1.6
<td class="accred">1.3
<td class="pac10blue">1.4
<td class="accred">-0.6
<tr>
<td>New Mexico
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>1.8
<td class="pac10blue">2.0
<td class="pac10blue">2.6
<td class="accred">2.4
<td class="accred">1.8
<td class="accred">1.5
<td class="accred">-0.7
<tr>
<td>GoDaddy.com
<td>2.3
<td class="accred">1.5
<td class="pac10blue">2.1
<td class="accred">2.0
<td class="accred">1.6
<td class="accred">1.1
<td class="pac10blue">2.2
<td class="pac10blue">2.4
<td class="accred">1.8
<td class="accred">1.2
<td class="accred">-0.7
<tr>
<td>Kraft Fight Hunger
<td>1.6
<td class="accred">1.2
<td class="pac10blue">2.0
<td class="pac10blue">2.2
<td class="pac10blue">4.5
<td class="accred">3.6
<td class="pac10blue">4.6
<td>4.6
<td class="accred">1.6
<td class="pac10blue">2.3
<td class="accred">-0.7
<tr>
<td>Belk
<td>2.0
<td class="pac10blue">2.2
<td class="accred">1.8
<td class="accred">1.5
<td class="pac10blue">3.9
<td class="accred">3.7
<td class="pac10blue">4.5
<td class="accred">3.9
<td class="accred">2.0
<td class="pac10blue">2.2
<td class="accred">-0.7
<tr>
<td>Hawaii
<td>2.4
<td class="accred">2.2
<td>2.2
<td>2.2
<td class="pac10blue">2.5
<td class="accred">1.5
<td class="pac10blue">3.0
<td class="accred">1.7
<td class="pac10blue">2.1
<td class="accred">1.4
<td class="accred">-0.8
<tr>
<td>Chick-fil-A
<td>4.0
<td>4.0
<td class="pac10blue">5.0
<td class="pac10blue">5.2
<td class="accred">4.8
<td class="pac10blue">5.1
<td class="accred">3.9
<td class="pac10blue">4.2
<td class="pac10blue">4.3
<td class="accred">3.6
<td class="accred">-0.9
<tr>
<td>Independence
<td>3.6
<td class="pac10blue">3.7
<td class="accred">2.8
<td>2.8
<td class="pac10blue">3.0
<td class="accred">1.9
<td class="accred">1.0
<td class="pac10blue">2.4
<td class="accred">1.4
<td class="pac10blue">1.5
<td class="accred">-1.2
<tr>
<td>Liberty
<td>1.7
<td class="pac10blue">2.4
<td class="pac10blue">4.6
<td class="accred">3.3
<td class="accred">3.2
<td class="pac10blue">4.1
<td class="accred">2.7
<td class="pac10blue">3.8
<td class="accred">3.0
<td class="accred">1.9
<td class="accred">-1.3
<tr>
<td>Holiday
<td>4.2
<td class="pac10blue">4.9
<td class="accred">4.0
<td class="pac10blue">5.1
<td class="accred">4.1
<td class="pac10blue">4.4
<td class="pac10blue">4.6
<td class="accred">3.7
<td class="accred">3.5
<td class="accred">2.7
<td class="accred">-1.7
<tr>
<td>Gator
<td>6.2
<td class="accred">4.2
<td class="accred">4.0
<td class="accred">3.9
<td>3.9
<td class="accred">2.6
<td class="pac10blue">4.1
<td class="accred">4.0
<td class="accred">1.7
<td class="pac10blue">1.9
<td class="accred">-2.2
<tr>
<td>Capital One
<td>5.9
<td class="pac10blue">8.0
<td class="accred">5.5
<td class="accred">5.2
<td class="pac10blue">5.8
<td class="pac10blue">9.1
<td class="accred">6.4
<td class="pac10blue">6.8
<td class="accred">3.7
<td class="accred">2.9
<td class="accred">-3.7
<tr>
<td>TicketCity
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>1.3
<td>1.4
<td>-
<tr>
<td>Pinstripe
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>
<td>2.3
<td>2.1
<td>-
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Hmmm... so it looks like about a quarter of the bowls actually exceeded their 2002-09 average this past year, which given the hype seems high. On top of that, only eight bowls dropped in ratings both of the last two years, as compared to 4 of the 5 BCS bowls. Interesting.
<p>So how much of these bowls' ratings have to do with what teams they select? A decent amount, no doubt. As we all know, bowls don't choose participants based on their records - they choose them based on how many seats they'll fill and how many eyes they'll draw to the TV screen.
<p>The final big table below lists how each team's bowl ratings have fared against those bowls when they haven't participated. For instance, in looking at Florida State, in 2004 the Seminoles were in the Gator Bowl, which garnered a 4.0 rating share. In the other years between 2002-2011 when Florida State wasn't participating, the Gator Bowl averaged a 3.6 share. (That doesn't include 2009 when the Seminoles participated, since it would skew the "without the Seminoles" average.) That means that in 2004, the Seminoles drew 0.4 more than the Gator Bowl average. Most years, bowls benefited from inviting the Seminoles, earning a total of nearly 17 share points more than their average without Florida State. And the Seminoles only participated in one bowl, the 2010 Chick-Fil-A Bowl, whose rating share was worse than their average. Make sense?
<p><table class="no-arrow" align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=13 class="font125 white">Ratings Shares Compared to Bowl's Average, 2002-2011
<tr>
<th class="sortable">Team
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2002
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2003
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2004
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2005
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2006
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2007
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2008
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2009
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2010
<th col width="40" class="sortable">2011
<th col width="40" class="sortable">Total
<th col width="40" class="sortable">Avg
<tr>
<td class="accred">Florida St
<td class="blue1">1.0
<td class="blue1">2.9
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="blue1">5.5
<td class="blue1">1.8
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="blue1">2.6
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="blue1">16.8
<td class="blue1">1.7
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">USC
<td class="blue1">2.2
<td class="blue1">2.7
<td class="red1">-2.4
<td class="blue1">5.6
<td class="blue1">2.3
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="blue1">0.0
<td class="blue1">2.0
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">11.8
<td class="blue1">1.5
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Ohio St
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="blue1">5.0
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="blue1">2.5
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-1.9
<td class="blue1">11.1
<td class="blue1">1.1
<tr>
<td class="">Notre Dame
<td class="blue1">2.8
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="blue1">4.6
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.0
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="blue1">11.0
<td class="blue1">1.6
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Texas
<td class="blue1">0.0
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">6.0
<td class="blue1">1.8
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">1.8
<td class="blue1">1.5
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="blue1">10.9
<td class="blue1">1.2
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Penn St
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">5.1
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="red1">-1.9
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="blue1">1.0
<td class="blue1">3.4
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">7.9
<td class="blue1">1.0
<tr>
<td class="accred">Miami (FL)
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="blue1">2.2
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">1.0
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">2.0
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">7.9
<td class="blue1">1.0
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Michigan
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">2.9
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="blue1">2.5
<td class="blue1">3.6
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-2.2
<td class="red1">-2.5
<td class="blue1">6.5
<td class="blue1">0.8
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">Florida
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="blue1">1.0
<td class="blue1">3.6
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">3.3
<td class="red1">-1.9
<td class="blue1">5.8
<td class="blue1">0.6
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">Georgia
<td class="blue1">1.0
<td class="blue1">2.4
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="red1">-1.2
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="blue1">1.0
<td class="blue1">4.6
<td class="blue1">0.5
<tr>
<td class="">Boise St
<td class="blue1">0.0
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="blue1">1.7
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="blue1">1.8
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="blue1">1.0
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="blue1">4.0
<td class="blue1">0.4
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Purdue
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="blue1">2.3
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="blue1">3.5
<td class="blue1">0.6
<tr>
<td class="accred">N Carolina
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">2.0
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="blue1">1.6
<td class="red1">-1.0
<td class="blue1">3.3
<td class="blue1">0.7
<tr>
<td class="accred">W Forest
<td class="blue1">2.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="blue1">3.1
<td class="blue1">0.6
<tr>
<td class="">Hawaii
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="red1">-1.4
<td class="blue1">1.3
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">2.8
<td class="blue1">0.4
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">Ole Miss
<td class="blue1">1.3
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">2.5
<td class="blue1">0.6
<tr>
<td class="">C Michigan
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">2.0
<td class="blue1">0.5
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Arizona St
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="blue1">2.0
<td class="blue1">0.3
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">UCLA
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="blue1">1.8
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="blue1">1.9
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">Arkansas
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">1.6
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Oregon
<td class="blue1">2.4
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="red1">-1.2
<td class="red1">-2.1
<td class="blue1">1.5
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">California
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">2.0
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.6
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Baylor
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.3
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="blue1">0.7
<tr>
<td class="accred">Maryland
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="">UCF
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="">
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="blue1">0.0
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.3
<td class="blue1">0.3
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">Rutgers
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="pac10purple">Oregon St
<td class="blue1">1.6
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">Louisville
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="blue1">1.7
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Kansas St
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Missouri
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">0.1
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Nwestern
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="blue1">1.3
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">0.1
<tr>
<td class="">Buffalo
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">0.8
<tr>
<td class="">Florida Atl
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">0.4
<tr>
<td class="">Marshall
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="">Memphis
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="blue1">0.1
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Iowa
<td class="blue1">2.1
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-2.1
<td class="blue1">1.8
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.4
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">1.0
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="blue1">0.1
<tr>
<td class="">Ball St
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="blue1">0.3
<tr>
<td class="">San Diego St
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="">Fresno St
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.2
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="blue1">0.1
<tr>
<td class="">N Texas
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="blue1">0.2
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Stanford
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-1.1
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.1
<tr>
<td class="">Tulane
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.3
<tr>
<td class="">Idaho
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.3
<tr>
<td class="">LA-Lafayette
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.3
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Washington
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">0.1
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Michigan St
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-2.5
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">0.0
<tr>
<td class="">Ohio
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.0
<tr>
<td class="">UAB
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.1
<tr>
<td class="">Akron
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.1
<tr>
<td class="">Bowl. Green
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.0
<td class="blue1">0.0
<tr>
<td class="">Miami (OH)
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="">
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="red1">0.0
<tr>
<td class="accred">Boston Coll.
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-1.7
<td class="red1">-1.0
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="blue1">0.0
<td class="blue1">1.6
<td class="red1">-1.4
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">0.0
<tr>
<td class="">Utah St
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-0.1
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Wash St
<td class="red1">-1.0
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-0.1
<tr>
<td class="">Pittsburgh
<td class="blue1">1.5
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-1.6
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">0.0
<tr>
<td class="">Tulsa
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="">
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">0.0
<tr>
<td class="">San Jose St
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-0.2
<tr>
<td class="">Arkansas St
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="red1">-0.1
<tr>
<td class="">Navy
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="red1">0.0
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Illinois
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.3
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-0.1
<tr>
<td class="">Temple
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-0.2
<tr>
<td class="">W Michigan
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.5
<tr>
<td class="">Troy
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.1
<tr>
<td class="">UTEP
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.2
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Texas A&M
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.6
<td class="">
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="red1">-1.9
<td class="">
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="blue1">1.6
<td class="blue1">1.3
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.1
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">Kentucky
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-1.1
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.1
<tr>
<td class="">Army
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-0.6
<tr>
<td class="">Wyoming
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-0.2
<tr>
<td class="">Mid Tenn St
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.0
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-0.2
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">LSU
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-2.4
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="blue1">1.8
<td class="red1">-2.9
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-0.1
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Oklahoma St
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="red1">-1.9
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="red1">-1.8
<td class="blue1">0.9
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="red1">-0.1
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">Syracuse
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.1
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-0.5
<tr>
<td class="">E Carolina
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-0.2
<tr>
<td class="">Florida Intl
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-0.5
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">Miss State
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-2.2
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-1.1
<td class="red1">-0.4
<tr>
<td class="">Houston
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="red1">-1.2
<td class="red1">-0.2
<tr>
<td class="">BYU
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.0
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-1.2
<td class="red1">-0.2
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">W Virginia
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-1.3
<td class="blue1">1.8
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-3.5
<td class="red1">-1.3
<td class="red1">-0.1
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">Vanderbilt
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.0
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.3
<td class="red1">-1.3
<td class="red1">-0.6
<tr>
<td class="accred">NC State
<td class="blue1">2.8
<td class="red1">-1.0
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.0
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="red1">-1.3
<td class="red1">-0.2
<tr>
<td class="">New Mexico
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.3
<td class="red1">-0.3
<tr>
<td class="">SMU
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="red1">-0.5
<tr>
<td class="">Rice
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.6
<td class="red1">-0.8
<tr>
<td class="">LA Tech
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.6
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="red1">-1.6
<td class="red1">-0.8
<tr>
<td class="">S Miss
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="red1">-1.6
<td class="red1">-0.2
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Colorado
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.7
<td class="red1">-0.4
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Kansas
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-1.0
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.8
<td class="red1">-0.4
<tr>
<td class="">W Michigan
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.8
<td class="red1">-0.9
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Iowa St
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.9
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-1.9
<td class="red1">-0.4
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Indiana
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.9
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.9
<td class="red1">-1.9
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">Connecticut
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="blue1">0.8
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="red1">-3.0
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.9
<td class="red1">-0.4
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Arizona
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-1.7
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-2.0
<td class="red1">-0.7
<tr>
<td class="">Toledo
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-2.1
<td class="red1">-0.4
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Nebraska
<td class="blue1">1.3
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">1.2
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-3.4
<td class="red1">-2.2
<td class="red1">-0.3
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">Tennessee
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-1.8
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="blue1">1.6
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-2.3
<td class="red1">-0.3
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Utah
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-1.6
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-2.3
<td class="red1">-0.3
<tr>
<td class="">TCU
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="blue1">1.8
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-1.0
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-2.3
<td class="red1">-0.3
<tr>
<td class="">Nevada
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-1.4
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-2.5
<td class="red1">-0.4
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Wisconsin
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="blue1">2.7
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="red1">-1.3
<td class="red1">-2.4
<td class="red1">-2.5
<td class="red1">-0.3
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">Auburn
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="blue1">1.4
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-1.2
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="red1">-2.6
<td class="red1">-0.3
<tr>
<td class="">Air Force
<td class="red1">-1.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="red1">-1.1
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-3.3
<td class="red1">-0.5
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Texas Tech
<td class="red1">-1.4
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-1.3
<td class="red1">-1.2
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-3.8
<td class="red1">-0.4
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">Cincinnati
<td class="blue1">0.1
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-2.6
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.3
<td class="red1">-3.8
<td class="red1">-0.5
<tr>
<td class="">N Illinois
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.8
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.6
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">0.0
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-3.9
<td class="red1">-0.6
<tr>
<td class="">Colorado St
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="red1">-1.8
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.4
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-4.0
<td class="red1">-1.0
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">S Carolina
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.1
<td class="red1">-0.3
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-3.4
<td class="red1">-4.3
<td class="red1">-0.7
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">S Florida
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-1.0
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-4.3
<td class="red1">-0.7
<tr>
<td class="accred">Virginia
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-0.1
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-4.6
<td class="red1">-0.8
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">Alabama
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="red1">-0.5
<td class="blue1">0.6
<td class="red1">-2.5
<td class="red1">-2.6
<td class="red1">-5.2
<td class="red1">-0.6
<tr>
<td class="accred">GA Tech
<td class="blue1">0.0
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-1.1
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-1.2
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="red1">-1.1
<td class="red1">-1.1
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-5.4
<td class="red1">-0.5
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Minnesota
<td class="red1">-0.6
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="blue1">0.2
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="red1">-1.7
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-1.4
<td class="red1">-2.2
<td class="">
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-5.7
<td class="red1">-0.8
<tr>
<td class="accred">VA Tech
<td class="red1">-1.4
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="blue1">0.3
<td class="blue1">0.4
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-2.9
<td class="red1">-0.2
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="red1">-2.3
<td class="red1">-6.4
<td class="red1">-0.6
<tr>
<td class="accred">Clemson
<td class="red1">-1.5
<td class="red1">-0.4
<td class="">
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-0.7
<td class="blue1">0.7
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-1.3
<td class="red1">-0.9
<td class="red1">-3.5
<td class="red1">-8.0
<td class="red1">-0.9
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Oklahoma
<td class="red1">-1.0
<td class="red1">-2.7
<td class="red1">-3.5
<td class="blue1">1.1
<td class="red1">-1.1
<td class="red1">-1.8
<td class="red1">-1.4
<td class="blue1">0.5
<td class="red1">-3.3
<td class="blue1">1.0
<td class="red1">-12.2
<td class="red1">-1.2
</tbody>
</table>
<p>As was the case two years ago, the story isn't at the top - it's at the bottom. Of course some of the biggies are the best at maximizing TV ratings for bowls - Florida State, USC,Ohio State, Notre Dame, and Texas are the top 5 and usually bring in at least a share point higher to whatever bowl they're playing in. But at the bottom are some biggies you might not expect - Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Alabama, and South Carolina are all in the bottom 10. The Sooners have boosted ratings a few times, but they've been in some clunkers too with seven of their past ten bowl games earning a full share or worse lower than that bowl's average without them. Ouch. The Hokies woes are more recent. They were on a good run at the beginning of the last decade, but since 2007 all of their games have fared worse than average on TV. Their ACC comrade Yellow Jackets are in the same boat. The Tide is a bit of stunner here, even though we knew the 2011 title game wouldn't help them. This year's championship and last year's Capital One Bowl were major disappointments, but not as bad as South Carolina's Capital One Bowl this year.
<p>So while the bowls seem to be drawing less attention, both attendance-wise and in the TV ratings, it's not as bad as some might make it seem by just looking at the BCS bowls. Get the right teams and your ratings might just stop dropping.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-75880165969390463302012-01-10T15:18:00.002-05:002012-01-10T15:48:46.661-05:00Four Alternates to the BCS, 2011 editionNow that the season is over, let's take a look at four of the main anti-BCS post-season options that are on the table. A season-by-season listing <a href="http://thenationalchampionshipissue.blogspot.com/2009/01/somebodys-always-gonna-get-hosed.html" target="_blank"><span style="color:#940f04;">is here</span></a>, and generally we've found that no matter what other system is used, there's still BCS-type problems of exclusion, rematches, and inadequacy. Let's see if 2011 changes any of that...
<p><table>
<th>2011 Final BCS Standings
<th>Conference Champs
<th>Relevant Bowls
<tr>
<td>1. LSU (13-0)
<br>2. Alabama (11-1)
<br>3. Oklahoma St (11-1)
<br>4. Stanford (11-1)
<br>5. Oregon (11-2)
<br>6. Arkansas (10-2)
<br>7. Boise St (11-1)
<br>8. Kansas St (10-2)
<br>9. South Carolina (10-2)
<br>10. Wisconsin (11-2)
<br>11. Virginia Tech (11-2)
<br>12. Baylor (9-3)
<td>ACC: Clemson
<br>Big10: Wisconsin
<br>Big12: Oklahoma St
<br>BigEast: West Virginia, Cincinnati, & Louisville
<br>Pac10: Oregon
<br>SEC: LSU
<td>National Champ: #2 Alabama def #1 LSU, 21-0
<br>Sugar: #13 Michigan def #11 Virginia Tech, 23-20
<br>Rose: #5 Oregon def #10 Wisconsin, 45-38
<br>Fiesta: #3 Oklahoma St def #4 Stanford, 41-38
<br>Orange: #23 West Virginia def #15 Clemson, 70-33
<br>---------------
<br>Cotton: #6Arkansas def #8 Kansas St, 29-16
</table>
<p><b><u>Plus-One Possibilities - w/ Bowl Results:</b></u>
<br>Alabama v Oklahoma St (v LSU?)
<br>Of course it seems like a plus-one could be tacked on pretty easily this year - we had two matchups involving all four top-4 teams, so just let the winners, Alabama and Oklahoma State play each other. Right? In theory, yes. But there's a bit of a rub - LSU is #2 in the final polls, both AP and Coaches. So, technically, if we take the two highest ranked teams after the bowls, as some people describe the plus-one, then we'd be treated to a third game between Bama and LSU.
<p><b><u>Plus-One Possibilities - Top 4:</b></u>
<br>#1 LSU v #4 Stanford, #2 Alabama v #3 Oklahoma State
<br>This is pretty close to the best a top-4 Plus-one setup before the bowls can offer. But even then there are issues in that neither Stanford nor Alabama won their conference championships. A case can be made for Bama, but with Oregon sitting at #5 with the Pac12 championship and a head-to-head win over Stanford in their pocket, it'd be hard to say this worked fairly. (But if you include Oregon instead, you've got a rematch between the Tigers and Ducks from the regular season...) Lotsa issues here.
<p><b><u>Eight-Team Playoff Possibilities - Conf Champs:</b></u>
<br>If you take the conf champs, you've got #1 LSU, #3 Oklahoma St, #5 Oregon, #10 Wisconsin, #11 Clemson, and #23 West Virginia. The two at-large would most fairly be #2 Alabama and #4 Stanford. But then you're leaving three teams better than half of the conference champs out, in #6 Arkansas, #7 Boise St, #8 Kansas St. Is it fair to leave them out of an 8-team playoff when they're all ranked in the top-8?
<p><b><u>Eight-Team Playoff Possibilities - Top 8:</b></u>
<br>If you just take the top eight in the BCS rankings, you're only including 3 of the 6 BCS conference champs: Wisconsin of the Big10 is getting left out, which wouldn't work, as is Clemson of the ACC and West Virginia of the BigEast. Seven of the eight teams would be from 3 conferences (SEC, Pac12, and Big12).
<p>____________________________________________________
<p>I think it's safe to say that any of those four options produces just as much controversy as the BCS this season, continuing the trend.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-91747036909638760442012-01-05T08:54:00.003-05:002012-01-05T09:54:09.720-05:00It's Articles Like These...<a href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/frank_deford/01/04/BCS-is-not-legitimate/index.html?sct=cf_wr_a1"><span style="color:#940f04;">...that give sports journalism a bad name</span></a>. Look, Deford is basically an institution and has written a ton of interesting, insightful pieces over his many years. But there's just something about the BCS that turns normally rational, commendable sportswriters into foaming-at-the-mouth zealots. The poster child for this when it comes to the BCS is Dan Wetzel, who writes so prolifically that he's bound to throw out some <a href="http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-wetzel_football_hostage_illegitimate_bcs_112911"><span style="color:#940f04;">less than stellar work</a></span>. But his vendetta against the BCS hinges on hyperbole, leading to extreme pieces that resemble propoganda more than journalism.
<p>We get it - a lot of people don't like the BCS. I'm no fan of the BCS either, but there's so much hatred of the system coming from some corners of the media that I feel compelled to push back toward the center. The BCS is not the devil incarnate. It's not a tragedy, a national embarrassment, or a hostage situation. Partly because it, and the national championship question in general, isn't as important as it's become in the past decade. There are good things about the BCS, and at times it does work, as much as those screaming from the press boxes want you to think that it doesn't. And most of all, the nearly consensus solution, a playoff, <a href="http://thenationalchampionshipissue.blogspot.com/2009/01/somebodys-always-gonna-get-hosed.html"><span style="color:#940f04;">would be just as problematic</span></a>.
<p>So let's look at the Deford piece and break it down.
<p><i>The Bowl Championship Series climaxes Monday with a game in New Orleans between Louisiana State and Alabama for the national bragging rights to Dixie. As there is a joke about the Holy Roman Empire, that it was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire, so can the same be said about the Bowl Championship Series. It's not a bowl.</i><span style="color:#000096;"> - Sure it is. In the dictionary, 'a football game played after the regular season by teams selected by the sponsors of the game'. Yup - that fits.</span><i> It's a game played in the Superdome. It's not a championship -- just an exhibition -- because the teams have been appointed to show up without earning the right to challenge for the title.</i><span style="color:#000096;"> - LSU and Alabama earned the right by finishing 1-2 in the end of the regular season polls. That's how the system works, even if you don't like it. And the winner will be recognized as a champion by the vast majority of the college football world, again even if you don't like it.</span><i> And it's not a series because no team plays more than once.</i><span style="color:#000096;"> The 'series' refers to the five BCS bowl games, not a single matchup played multiple times. You're trying to get technical with all these cute definitions, but that can cut both ways. </span><i>No wonder the BCS is so despised.</i><span style="color:#000096;"> Yeah, people hate the BCS because it's grammatically incorrect. That's it.</span><i>
<p>Remember Diogenes -- the guy who browsed around with a lantern looking for just one honest man? Well, I am the Diogenes of the BCS, for armed with a bullhorn and a searchlight, I've traveled this great land of ours, desperately hoping to find just a single fan of the BCS. But, alas, I've found nary a one.</i><span style="color:#000096;"> Bullshit. Did you talk to any of the bowl CEO's? Or fans in the SEC? How about the players on TCU's team who won the Rose Bowl last year and who otherwise wouldn't have had the chance to even play in Pasadena? You couldn't find a single person? Bullshit hyperbole that basically calls the rest of your piece into question.</span><i>
Still, we Americans continue, lobotomized, to accept the BCS as legitimate, when it's the goofiest competition this side of the Iowa caucuses and the People's Choice Awards. But ... but if we should just think about it for a moment and apply its arranged manipulations to other sports we could realize how unfair and imbecilic the Bowl Championship Series really is.</i><span style="color:#000096;"> That's the point - you can't compare it to any other sport or situation because it's completely different from anything else in major sports. That one fact basically makes your following hypotheticals completely pointless.</span><i>
<p>Consider:
If the BCS ran the Olympics, the track and field 100-meter final would be held in September, six or seven weeks after the scheduled heats. You see, that is consistent with the cuckoo BCS scheduling. LSU's last game was on December 3rd, Alabama's way back in November, 45 days ago. Nowhere else in sport is there such a pointless, bizarre interval.</i><span style="color:#000096;"> Okay, 1) that's not a feature of the BCS, it's a feature of the bowl system that's been around for nearly a century. And 2) since you're a fan of getting technical, using your chosen metaphor, the Outdoor Track & Field Championship races to make the U.S. National Team, basically a semi-final for the Olympic final, are held anywhere from 6-10 weeks prior. This year they'll be held in late June, nearly 45 days before the London 2012 Olympics take place. So there's that.</span><i>
<p>If the BCS ran the NFL there would be no playoffs. Instead, a bunch of mysterious computers and some dubious experts -- many of whom have conflicts of interest -- would just declare which teams qualified for the Super Bowl ... then schedule the matchup forty-five days from now, of course. </i><span style="color:#000096;">Again, with the hypotheticals. The reason college football needs rankings and computers is because they play too few games with too many competitors. The NFL has 32 teams, college football 120. The NFL has 16 games, college football 12-13. There's just not enough information to go on using straight W-L formulas like the NFL and other sports do.</span><i>
<p>If the BCS ran the World Series, tens of millions of dollars would still be made, and the leagues and the owners and the managers and everyone connected with the Series would be paid ... well everyone except for the players. But, you see, this is in keeping with the BCS rationale that players are actually much happier playing when they aren't burdened by making money. Of course, baseball boosters would slip some cash under the table to the major leaguers to make sure that amateurism remains pure.</i><span style="color:#000096;"> And again, this isn't a BCS issue - it's an NCAA one, and one that most of the representative schools just voted against at that. The conflation of the BCS and the NCAA is another little trick that gets used, but breaks down once readers realize that a change to one wouldn't necessarily result in a change to the other. Sure, go ahead and pay players millions of dollars - what does that have to do with the BCS?</span><i>
<p>If the BCS ran the World Cup, there would be no World Cup. Instead, there would just be a mind-numbing plethora of meaningless little soccer matches, international bowl games -- Demitasse Games --</i><span style="color:#000096;"> you mean like the international "friendlies" they have now?</span><i> played between disparate countries like Peru vs. Slovenia, scheduled at odd neutral sites like Sri Lanka.</i><span style="color:#000096;"> Now you're just being ridiculous. Even with all those friendlies, they still play the tournament. And the international rankings play a big part in how teams are selected to participate.</span><i>
<p>I hope you enjoy watching the arranged marriage that the BCS is putting on Tuesday. </i><span style="color:#000096;">Is he being serious here? Sure people are going to tune in and enjoy the game - probably about 20 million people, including yourself I'm sure. And that's the whole point - it's going to be a fantastic matchup between two stellar teams, and even though they've played once already this year, leaving the whole championship question aside, why wouldn't people want to see them play again? Why do those who hate the BCS feel the need to drag the whole sport down when they could just as easily ignore the championship ramifications and focus on the more enjoyable aspects of the contest? <a href="http://thenationalchampionshipissue.blogspot.com/2009/01/there-is-what-is-and-there-is-what-we.html"></span><span style="color:#940f04;">I've said it a bunch before,</span></a><span style="color:#000096;"> but there's much more to college football than just the BCS.</span>Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-79311696602717031242011-12-27T13:36:00.003-05:002011-12-27T13:43:06.761-05:002011 Top to Bottom<style TYPE="text/css">
.bluetext { color:#000096;
}
.redtext { color:#960000;
}
.whitetext { color:#FFFFFF;
}
.blacktext { color:#000000;
}
.gray { background-color:#AAAAAA;
}
.red4 { background-color:#D20000;
}
.red3 { background-color:#DA5252;
}
.red2 { background-color:#EE8282;
}
.red1 { background-color:#F5C3C3;
}
.red15 { background-color:#D5C3C3;
}
.red0 { background-color:#FBEBEB;
}
.blue0 { background-color:#E3F2F9;
}
.blue1 { background-color:#C4E0EE;
}
.blue2 { background-color:#9EC6E2;
}
.blue3 { background-color:#479ACD;
}
.blue4 { background-color:#2B5E8D;
}
.backgroundtest { background-color: #FFD861;
}
</style>
<p>Alrighty, as we've done the past few years, we're going to break down each conference to see which ones were the most balanced, top to bottom.
<p>As always, the premise is that the more often the team with fewer conference victories wins, which we’ll call a "Statistical Upset", the more balanced the conference. <b>Basically, how often do the teams at the bottom upset the teams at the top?</b> The maximum here is 50%, since it's impossible to have more than half of the games in a conference be upsets. The average over all conferences during the BCS era sits at about 13.6%. Below is the big parity table - the numbers in red are below average, blue are above, red shaded means that conference was the least balanced conference in any particular year, and blue shaded is the most balanced in any year.
<p>
<table class="no-arrow" align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=16 class="font125 white">% of Conf Games that were Statistical Upsets
<tr>
<th class="sortable">Conf
<th class="sortable">1998
<th class="sortable">1999
<th class="sortable">2000
<th class="sortable">2001
<th class="sortable">2002
<th class="sortable">2003
<th class="sortable">2004
<th class="sortable">2005
<th class="sortable">2006
<th class="sortable">2007
<th class="sortable">2008
<th class="sortable">2009
<th class="sortable">2010
<th class="sortable">2011
<th class="sortable">Conf Avg
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ACC
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>06.3%
<td class="bluetext">20.7%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>05.9%
<td class="bluetext">21.9%
<td class="bluetext">11.8%
<td class="bluetext">21.2%
<td class="redtext">13.2%
<td class="pac10blue">25.0%
<td class="bluetext">18.6%
<td class="redtext">15.6%
<td class="pac10blue">29.0%
<td class="bluetext">15.2%
<td class="redtext">12.5%
<td class="pac10blue">20.9%
<td class="bluetext">17.0%
<tr>
<td>Pac10
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>08.1%
<td class="bluetext">18.9%
<td class="bluetext">16.1%
<td class="redtext">10.8%
<td class="bluetext">12.5%
<td class="pac10blue">22.2%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>07.9%
<td class="redtext">10.8%
<td class="pac10blue">28.9%
<td class="bluetext">30.0%
<td class="bluetext">14.0%
<td class="pac10blue">22.0%
<td class="bluetext">14.6%
<td class="bluetext">16.0%
<td class="bluetext">16.6%
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>09.1%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>04.5%
<td class="bluetext">16.7%
<td class="bluetext">15.6%
<td class="pac10blue">20.0%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>07.5%
<td class="bluetext">18.2%
<td class="bluetext">21.4%
<td class="bluetext">21.3%
<td class="redtext">13.6%
<td class="bluetext">14.6%
<td class="bluetext">20.0%
<td class="bluetext">20.9%
<td class="bluetext">12.8%
<td class="bluetext">15.4%
<tr>
<td>SunBelt
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class="redtext">11.8%
<td class="bluetext">11.1%
<td class="redtext">11.8%
<td class="pac10blue">26.9%
<td class="bluetext">23.8%
<td class="redtext">16.0%
<td class="redtext">12.5%
<td class="bluetext">16.7%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>05.9%
<td class="pac10blue">29.0%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>00.0%
<td class="bluetext">15.0%
<tr>
<td>Big10
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>08.1%
<td class="bluetext">16.7%
<td class="pac10blue">21.6%
<td class="pac10blue">29.7%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>07.3%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>07.9%
<td class="redtext">12.5%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>05.4%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>05.1%
<td class="bluetext">19.4%
<td class="redtext">13.2%
<td class="bluetext">20.0%
<td class="bluetext">17.9%
<td class="bluetext">15.6%
<td class="bluetext">14.3%
<tr>
<td>Year Avg
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>09.8%
<td class="">16.0%
<td class="">12.4%
<td class="">14.5%
<td class="">10.7%
<td class="">13.2%
<td class="">13.4%
<td class="">15.3%
<td class="">16.2%
<td class="">17.8%
<td class="">13.2%
<td class="">12.6%
<td class="">14.1%
<td class="">11.1%
<td class="">13.6%
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td class="bluetext">11.1%
<td class="bluetext">16.0%
<td class="bluetext">18.6%
<td class="bluetext">15.9%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>07.1%
<td class="redtext">11.3%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>07.5%
<td class="bluetext">19.0%
<td class="redtext">13.6%
<td class="bluetext">22.0%
<td class="redtext">10.6%
<td class="redtext">10.0%
<td class="redtext">10.2%
<td class="bluetext">11.8%
<td class="redtext">13.2%
<tr>
<td>Big12
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>09.3%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>09.5%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>06.5%
<td class="redtext">10.9%
<td class="bluetext">11.4%
<td class="bluetext">15.6%
<td class="bluetext">14.0%
<td class="bluetext">20.0%
<td class="bluetext">20.9%
<td class="bluetext">19.5%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>02.6%
<td class="bluetext">15.6%
<td class="bluetext">18.4%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>09.3%
<td class="redtext">13.1%
<tr>
<td>MtnWest
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class="bluetext">25.0%
<td class="bluetext">20.8%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>07.7%
<td class="bluetext">15.4%
<td class="bluetext">20.8%
<td class="redtext">12.0%
<td class="bluetext">21.9%
<td class="redtext">15.2%
<td class="redtext">11.8%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>02.9%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>00.0%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>03.2%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>00.0%
<td class="redtext">12.1%
<tr>
<td>BigEast
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>08.3%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>07.7%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>03.8%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>00.0%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>03.8%
<td class="redtext">11.5%
<td class="bluetext">14.3%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>08.3%
<td class="bluetext">20.0%
<td class="pac10blue">30.4%
<td class="redtext">12.5%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>08.7%
<td class="bluetext">20.8%
<td class="bluetext">17.4%
<td class="redtext">12.0%
<tr>
<td>SEC
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>06.3%
<td class="redtext">12.8%
<td class="bluetext">14.0%
<td class="bluetext">18.6%
<td class="bluetext">11.4%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>04.7%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>07.0%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>09.3%
<td class="redtext">13.0%
<td class="bluetext">20.9%
<td class="bluetext">19.0%
<td class="bluetext">15.4%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>07.0%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>06.5%
<td class="redtext">11.8%
<tr>
<td>WAC
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>08.3%
<td class="pac10blue">27.3%
<td class="bluetext">12.5%
<td class="bluetext">16.2%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>05.7%
<td class="redtext">10.3%
<td class="bluetext">13.9%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>03.2%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>05.9%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>00.0%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>09.7%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>06.3%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>00.0%
<td class="bluetext">16.7%
<td class="redtext"><span style="display:none">0</span>09.7%
<tr>
<td>BigWest
<td class="pac10blue">23.1%
<td class="bluetext">16.7%
<td class="accred"><span style="display:none">0</span>00.0%
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class=""><span style="display:none">0</span>
<td class="redtext">13.2%
</tbody>
</table>
<p>On the whole, this was the stablest inter-conference year we've had since 2002. The average number of upsets per conference was just over 5, or an 11.1% average. The highest was the ACC's 20.9%, which is the second-lowest high of the BCS era, and we had not one but two conferences with zero upsets.
<p>Let's look at the individual conferences for 2011.
<p><b>Games shaded blue are ones in which the team with more conference victories won, red are ones in which the team with more conference victories lost, and green are ones between teams with the same number of conference victories. The numbers represent the margin of victory (or loss, if the number is negative) for the team listed in the farthest left-hand row.</b>
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=13 class="font125 white">ACC 2011 - 20.9% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">Clem
<th col width="45">VA Tech
<th col width="45">FL St
<th col width="45">GATech
<th col width="45">Virginia
<th col width="45">Wake F
<th col width="45">NCState
<th col width="45">BC
<th col width="45">Miami
<th col width="45">UNC
<th col width="45">Duke
<th col width="45">MD
<tr>
<td class=>Clemson (7-2)
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">20
<td class="pac10blue">5
<td class="accred">-14
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="accred">-24
<td class="pac10blue">22
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">21
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">11
<tr>
<td class="">VA Tech (7-2)
<td class="">-20
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">11
<td class="pac10blue">38
<td class="pac10blue">21
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">16
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Florida St (5-3)
<td class="">-5
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="bigeastgreen">-1
<td class="bigeastgreen">-5
<td class="pac10blue">34
<td class="pac10blue">31
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">25
<td class="pac10blue">25
<tr>
<td class="">GA Tech (5-3)
<td class="">14
<td class="">-11
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">-3
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-17
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">5
<tr>
<td class="">Virginia (5-3)
<td class=>
<td class="">-3
<td class="">1
<td class="">3
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-14
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="accred">-11
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="pac10blue">18
<tr>
<td class="">Wake F (5-3)
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-21
<td class="">5
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">8
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-25
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="pac10blue">21
<tr>
<td class="">NC State (4-4)
<td class="">24
<td class=>
<td class="">-34
<td class="">-10
<td class="">14
<td class="">-7
<td class="gray">
<td class="accred">-4
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">13
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">15
<tr>
<td class="">BC (3-5)
<td class="">-22
<td class="">-16
<td class="">-31
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">-8
<td class="">4
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">7
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-1
<td class="pac10blue">11
<tr>
<td class="">Miami FL (3-5)
<td class=>
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-4
<td class="">17
<td class="">-7
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">-7
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">6
<td class="pac10blue">35
<td class="accred">-8
<tr>
<td class="">N Carolina (3-5)
<td class="">-21
<td class="">-3
<td class=>
<td class="">-7
<td class="">11
<td class="">25
<td class="">-13
<td class=>
<td class="">-6
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">16
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Duke (1-7)
<td class=>
<td class="">-4
<td class="">-25
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-10
<td class="">-1
<td class=>
<td class="">1
<td class="">-35
<td class="">-16
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Maryland (1-7)
<td class="">-11
<td class=>
<td class="">-25
<td class="">-5
<td class="">-18
<td class="">-21
<td class="">-15
<td class="">-11
<td class="">8
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>After being under average last year, the ACC rebounded with a slew of medium-sized upsets. NC State over Clemson was the biggest of the bunch, not only because the Tigers were the conference champs but because of the absolute beatdown the game was - a 24 point whuppin'. The Wolfpack had their hands in two other upsets as well, defeating Virginia but losing to Boston College.
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=13 class="font125 white">BigEast 2011 - 17.4% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">WestVA
<th col width="45">Cincy
<th col width="45">L'vlle
<th col width="45">Pitt
<th col width="45">Rutg
<th col width="45">UConn
<th col width="45">USF
<th col width="45">Syrac
<tr>
<td class=>W Virginia (5-2)
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">3
<td class="bigeastgreen">-3
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="pac10blue">27
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="accred">-26
<tr>
<td class="">Cincinnati (5-2)
<td class="">-3
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">9
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="accred">-17
<td class="pac10blue">8
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">17
<tr>
<td class="">Louisville (5-2)
<td class="">3
<td class="">-9
<td class="gray">
<td class="accred">-7
<td class="pac10blue">2
<td class="pac10blue">14
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="pac10blue">17
<tr>
<td class="">Pitt (4-3)
<td class="">-1
<td class="">-3
<td class="">7
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">-24
<td class="pac10blue">15
<td class="pac10blue">27
<td class="pac10blue">13
<tr>
<td class="">Rutgers (4-3)
<td class="">-10
<td class="">17
<td class="">-2
<td class="">24
<td class="gray">
<td class="accred">-18
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">3
<tr>
<td class="">UConn (3-4)
<td class="">-27
<td class="">-8
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-15
<td class="">18
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">6
<td class="pac10blue">7
<tr>
<td class="">USF (1-6)
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-10
<td class="">-27
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-6
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">20
<tr>
<td class="">Syracuse (1-6)
<td class="">26
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-13
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-20
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Another good year in the BigEast, quite exciting right up until the end. That corner game is huge - that was one of West Virginia's two conference losses, and Syracuse's only conference win - the Mountaineers are lucky it didn't ruin their BCS chances.
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=10 class="font125 white">WAC 2011 - 16.7% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">LATech
<th col width="45">Nevada
<th col width="45">UtahSt
<th col width="45">FresSt
<th col width="45">Hawaii
<th col width="45">SanJSt
<th col width="45">NMexSt
<th col width="45">Idaho
<tr>
<td class=>LA Tech (6-1)
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">20
<td class="accred">-18
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="pac10blue">44
<td class="pac10blue">13
<tr>
<td class="">Nevada (5-2)
<td class="">-4
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">-4
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">14
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">14
<td class="pac10blue">53
<tr>
<td class="">Utah St (5-2)
<td class="">-7
<td class="">4
<td class="gray">
<td class="accred">-10
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">7
<tr>
<td class="">Fresno St (3-4)
<td class="">-20
<td class="">-7
<td class="">10
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">3
<td class="bigeastgreen">-3
<td class="accred">-3
<td class="pac10blue">24
<tr>
<td class="">Hawaii (3-4)
<td class="">18
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-4
<td class="">-3
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">-1
<td class="pac10blue">11
<td class="pac10blue">2
<tr>
<td class="">San Jose St (3-4)
<td class="">-10
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-1
<td class="">3
<td class="">1
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="accred">-3
<tr>
<td class="">New Mex St (2-5)
<td class="">-44
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-3
<td class="">3
<td class="">-11
<td class="">-10
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">7
<tr>
<td class="">Idaho (1-6)
<td class="">-13
<td class="">-53
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-24
<td class="">-2
<td class="">3
<td class="">-7
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>The only thing more interesting in this conference than Louisiana Tech rising to the top was their loss to 3-4 Hawaii - big one there. Most of the teams were bunched up in the middle of the conference, which always makes for a higher average. 16.7% is the most balanced the WAC has been since 1999 and the first time since 2004 that they've been in double digits. Nice.
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=13 class="font125 white">Pac12 2011 - 16.0% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">Oregon
<th col width="45">Stanfd
<th col width="45">USC
<th col width="45">Wash
<th col width="45">UCLA
<th col width="45">Cal
<th col width="45">ArizSt
<th col width="45">Utah
<th col width="45">OreSt
<th col width="45">Ariz
<th col width="45">WashSt
<th col width="45">Colo
<tr>
<td class=>Oregon (9-1)
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">23
<td class="accred">-3
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="pac10blue">18
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class="pac10blue">14
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class="pac10blue">25
<td class="pac10blue">15
<td class="pac10blue">43
<tr>
<td class="">Stanford (8-1)
<td class="">-23
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">8
<td class="pac10blue">44
<td class="pac10blue">26
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">25
<td class="pac10blue">27
<td class="pac10blue">30
<td class="pac10blue">41
<tr>
<td class="">USC (7-2)
<td class="">3
<td class="">-8
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">23
<td class="pac10blue">50
<td class="pac10blue">21
<td class="accred">-21
<td class="pac10blue">9
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">25
<tr>
<td class="">Washington (5-4)
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-44
<td class="">-23
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">8
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="accred">-17
<td class="pac10blue">11
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="pac10blue">28
<tr>
<td class="">UCLA (5-5)
<td class="">-18
<td class="">-26
<td class="">-50
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="accred">-25
<td class="pac10blue">8
<td class="accred">-36
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">39
<tr>
<td class="">Cal (4-5)
<td class="">-28
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-21
<td class="">-8
<td class="">-17
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">9
<td class="bigeastgreen">24
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">23
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Arizona St (4-5)
<td class="">-14
<td class=>
<td class="">21
<td class=>
<td class="">-1
<td class="">-9
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">21
<td class="pac10blue">15
<td class="accred">-4
<td class="accred">-10
<td class="pac10blue">34
<tr>
<td class="">Utah (4-5)
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">-9
<td class="">-17
<td class="">25
<td class="">-24
<td class="">-21
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">19
<td class="pac10blue">13
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="accred">-3
<tr>
<td class="">Oregon St (3-6)
<td class="">-28
<td class="">-25
<td class=>
<td class="">17
<td class="">-8
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-15
<td class="">-19
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="pac10blue">23
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Arizona (2-7)
<td class="">-25
<td class="">-27
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-11
<td class="">36
<td class=>
<td class="">4
<td class="">-13
<td class="">-10
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="bigeastgreen">-19
<tr>
<td class="">Wash St (2-7)
<td class="">-15
<td class="">-30
<td class=>
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-23
<td class="">10
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-23
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">4
<tr>
<td class="">Colorado (2-7)
<td class="">-43
<td class="">-41
<td class="">-25
<td class="">-28
<td class="">-39
<td class=>
<td class="">-34
<td class="">3
<td class=>
<td class="">19
<td class="">-4
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Even with the addition of Utah and Colorado, there was the usual amount of chaos in the Pac12 - this is their sixth year above average, averaging nearly 21% in that span. None of the upsets were all that huge, but there were a lot of them and a good number of teams bunched up in the middle of the pack. Arizona State, the disappointment of the year in the conference, had their hand in three of the upsets, beating USC but losing to Arizona and Washington St.
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=13 class="font125 white">Big10 2011 - 15.6% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">Wisc
<th col width="45">Mich St
<th col width="45">Mich
<th col width="45">PennSt
<th col width="45">Nebras
<th col width="45">Iowa
<th col width="45">Purdue
<th col width="45">NWest
<th col width="45">OhioSt
<th col width="45">Illi
<th col width="45">Minn
<th col width="45">Indi
<tr>
<td class=>Wisconsin (7-2)
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">-6
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">38
<td class="pac10blue">31
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">45
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-4
<td class="pac10blue">11
<td class="pac10blue">29
<td class="pac10blue">52
<tr>
<td class="">Michigan St (7-2)
<td class="">6
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">14
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-21
<td class="pac10blue">16
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">14
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">52
<tr>
<td class="">Michigan (6-2)
<td class=>
<td class="">-14
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class="accred">-8
<td class="pac10blue">22
<td class="pac10blue">18
<td class="pac10blue">6
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="pac10blue">58
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Penn St (6-2)
<td class="">-38
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="accred">-3
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="pac10blue">5
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="pac10blue">6
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">6
<tr>
<td class="">Nebraska (5-3)
<td class="">-31
<td class="">21
<td class="">-28
<td class="">3
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">13
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-3
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">27
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Iowa (4-4)
<td class=>
<td class="">-16
<td class="">8
<td class="">-10
<td class="">-13
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">10
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-1
<td class="pac10blue">21
<tr>
<td class="">Purdue (4-4)
<td class="">-45
<td class=>
<td class="">-22
<td class="">-5
<td class=>
<td class="">-10
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class="pac10blue">8
<tr>
<td class="">N'western (3-5)
<td class=>
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-18
<td class="">-10
<td class="">3
<td class="">-10
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-3
<td class="pac10blue">15
<td class="pac10blue">21
<tr>
<td class="">Ohio St (3-5)
<td class="">4
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-6
<td class="">-6
<td class="">-7
<td class=>
<td class="">-3
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">14
<tr>
<td class="">Illinois (2-6)
<td class="">-11
<td class=>
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-3
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">-7
<td class="">3
<td class="">-10
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">-20
<td class="pac10blue">21
<tr>
<td class="">Minn (2-6)
<td class="">-29
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-58
<td class=>
<td class="">-27
<td class="">1
<td class="">-28
<td class="">-15
<td class=>
<td class="">20
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Indiana (0-8)
<td class="">-52
<td class="">-52
<td class=>
<td class="">-6
<td class=>
<td class="">-21
<td class="">-8
<td class="">-21
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-21
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Ohio State's win over Wisconsin stands out here in a big way, even though it was a close game. Not too many games between similar teams and some mid-level upsets made this an interesting season with the new-look of Nebraska added in. It was a rocky first year for the Huskers, who were involved in three of the upsets, losing to Northwestern but beating Penn St and Michigan St.
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=13 class="font125 white">CUSA 2011 - 12.8% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">Houst
<th col width="45">Tulsa
<th col width="45">S Miss
<th col width="45">Marsh
<th col width="45">SMU
<th col width="45">E Car
<th col width="45">UAB
<th col width="45">UCF
<th col width="45">Rice
<th col width="45">UTEP
<th col width="45">Memph
<th col width="45">Tulane
<tr>
<td class=>Houston (8-1)
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">32
<td class="accred">-21
<td class="pac10blue">35
<td class="pac10blue">30
<td class="pac10blue">53
<td class="pac10blue">43
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">39
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">56
<tr>
<td class="">Tulsa (7-1)
<td class="">-32
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">42
<td class="pac10blue">31
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">18
<td class="pac10blue">29
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">28
<tr>
<td class="">S Miss (7-2)
<td class="">21
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="accred">-6
<td class="pac10blue">24
<td class="pac10blue">20
<td class="accred">-3
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="pac10blue">24
<td class="pac10blue">18
<td class="pac10blue">37
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Marshall (5-3)
<td class="">-35
<td class="">-42
<td class="">6
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">45
<td class="accred">-10
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">SMU (5-3)
<td class="">-30
<td class="">-31
<td class="">-24
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">21
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">11
<td class="pac10blue">42
<td class="pac10blue">21
<tr>
<td class="">E Carolina (4-4)
<td class="">-53
<td class=>
<td class="">-20
<td class="">-7
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">5
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-5
<td class="pac10blue">18
<td class="pac10blue">21
<tr>
<td class="">UAB (3-5)
<td class="">-43
<td class="">-17
<td class="">3
<td class="">-45
<td class=>
<td class="">-5
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">2
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">6
<td class="accred">-39
<tr>
<td class="">UCF (3-5)
<td class=>
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-1
<td class="">10
<td class="">-21
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-2
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="pac10blue">41
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Rice (3-5)
<td class="">-39
<td class="">-18
<td class="">-24
<td class="">-4
<td class="">-3
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class="pac10blue">22
<td class="pac10blue">12
<tr>
<td class="">UTEP (2-6)
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-29
<td class="">-18
<td class=>
<td class="">-11
<td class="">5
<td class=>
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-4
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">37
<tr>
<td class="">Memphis (1-7)
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">-37
<td class="">-1
<td class="">-42
<td class="">-18
<td class="">-6
<td class="">-41
<td class="">-22
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">16
<tr>
<td class="">Tulane (1-7)
<td class="">-56
<td class="">-28
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">-21
<td class="">-21
<td class="">39
<td class=>
<td class="">-12
<td class="">-37
<td class="">-16
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Not too many upsets in the CUSA this season, but enough to put it at a little over average. Obviously the biggest was Southern Miss over Houston, but statistically it's not that significant because the two of them were only separated by two games in the standings.
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=15 class="font125 white">MAC 2011 - 11.8% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">N Ill
<th col width="45">Tledo
<th col width="40">Ohio
<th col width="45">Templ
<th col width="45">W Mich
<th col width="45">Ball St
<th col width="45">E Mich
<th col width="40">Kent
<th col width="45">Bowl G
<th col width="45">Miami
<th col width="45">Buff
<th col width="45">C Mich
<th col width="45">Akron
<tr>
<td class=>N Illinois (8-1)
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">29
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">6
<td class="pac10blue">30
<td class="pac10blue">31
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="accred">-7
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Toledo (7-1)
<td class="">-3
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">23
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="pac10blue">38
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">21
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">27
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Ohio (6-3)
<td class="">-3
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-3
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="accred">-1
<td class="pac10blue">15
<td class="pac10blue">17
<tr>
<td class="">Temple (5-3)
<td class=>
<td class="">-23
<td class="">-4
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">42
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">18
<td class="accred">-3
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">34
<td class="pac10blue">38
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">W Mich (5-3)
<td class="">-29
<td class="">-3
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="accred">-4
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">24
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">30
<td class="pac10blue">49
<tr>
<td class="">Ball St (4-4)
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-17
<td class="">3
<td class="">-42
<td class="">-10
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">2
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">E Mich (4-4)
<td class="">-6
<td class="">-38
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">4
<td class="">-2
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">-6
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">13
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">8
<tr>
<td class="">Kent (4-4)
<td class="">-30
<td class=>
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-18
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">6
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">12
<td class="accred">-6
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">32
<tr>
<td class="">B Green (3-5)
<td class="">-31
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-1
<td class="">3
<td class="">-24
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">-12
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">14
<td class="pac10blue">14
<td class=>
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Miami OH (3-5)
<td class=>
<td class="">-21
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-3
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">6
<td class="">-14
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">32
<tr>
<td class="">Buffalo (2-6)
<td class="">-1
<td class=>
<td class="">1
<td class="">-34
<td class=>
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-13
<td class=>
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-28
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">41
<tr>
<td class="">C Mich (2-6)
<td class="">7
<td class="">-27
<td class="">-15
<td class=>
<td class="">-30
<td class="">-4
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-3
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">41
<tr>
<td class="">Akron (0-8)
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-38
<td class="">-49
<td class=>
<td class="">-8
<td class="">-32
<td class=>
<td class="">-32
<td class="">-41
<td class="">-1
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Central Michigan over Northern Illinois - how did that happen? Buffalo over Ohio was a close second for upset of the conference season.
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=13 class="font125 white">Big12 2011 - 9.3% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">OK St
<th col width="45">KS St
<th col width="45">Baylor
<th col width="45">Okla
<th col width="45">Mizzou
<th col width="45">Texas
<th col width="45">TX A&M
<th col width="45">Iowa St
<th col width="45">TX Tech
<th col width="45">Kansas
<tr>
<td class=>Oklahoma St (8-1)
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">35
<td class="pac10blue">34
<td class="pac10blue">21
<td class="pac10blue">12
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="accred">-6
<td class="pac10blue">60
<td class="pac10blue">42
<tr>
<td class="">Kansas St (7-2)
<td class="">-7
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="accred">-41
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">38
<tr>
<td class="">Baylor (6-3)
<td class="">-35
<td class="">-1
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">7
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">24
<td class="accred">-27
<td class="pac10blue">23
<td class="pac10blue">24
<td class="pac10blue">1
<tr>
<td class="">Oklahoma (6-3)
<td class="">-34
<td class="">41
<td class="">-7
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="pac10blue">38
<td class="pac10blue">16
<td class="pac10blue">20
<td class="accred">-3
<td class="pac10blue">30
<tr>
<td class="">Missouri (5-4)
<td class="">-21
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-10
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">12
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class="pac10blue">35
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class="pac10blue">14
<tr>
<td class="">Texas (4-5)
<td class="">-12
<td class="">-4
<td class="">-24
<td class="">-38
<td class="">-12
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">2
<td class="pac10blue">23
<td class="pac10blue">32
<td class="pac10blue">43
<tr>
<td class="">Texas A&M (4-5)
<td class="">-1
<td class="">-3
<td class="">27
<td class="">-16
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-2
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">16
<td class="pac10blue">5
<td class="pac10blue">54
<tr>
<td class="">Iowa St (3-6)
<td class="">6
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-23
<td class="">-20
<td class="">-35
<td class="">-23
<td class="">-16
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">34
<td class="pac10blue">3
<tr>
<td class="">Texas Tech (2-7)
<td class="">-60
<td class="">-7
<td class="">-24
<td class="">3
<td class="">-4
<td class="">-32
<td class="">-5
<td class="">-34
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">11
<tr>
<td class="">Kansas (0-9)
<td class="">-42
<td class="">-38
<td class="">-1
<td class="">-30
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-43
<td class="">-54
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-11
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Only four upsets in the Big12 this season, but they were all doozies - Iowa State over Oklahoma State is there, as is Texas A&M over Baylor and Texas Tech over Oklahoma. Even Oklahoma over Kansas State is noteworthy because of the sheer point differential.
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=13 class="font125 white">SEC 2010 - 6.5% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">LSU
<th col width="45">Bama
<th col width="45">UGA
<th col width="45">Ark
<th col width="45">SoCar
<th col width="45">Aubrn
<th col width="45">Fla
<th col width="45">Kenty
<th col width="45">MissSt
<th col width="45">Vandy
<th col width="45">Tenn
<th col width="45">Miss
<tr>
<td class=>LSU (9-0)
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">32
<td class="pac10blue">24
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">35
<td class="pac10blue">30
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class="pac10blue">13
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">31
<td class="pac10blue">49
<tr>
<td class="">Alabama (7-1)
<td class="">-3
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">24
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="pac10blue">34
<td class="pac10blue">31
<td class="pac10blue">45
<tr>
<td class="">Georgia (7-2)
<td class="">-32
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class="accred">-3
<td class="pac10blue">38
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class="pac10blue">9
<td class="pac10blue">14
<td class="pac10blue">5
<td class="pac10blue">8
<td class="pac10blue">14
<tr>
<td class="">Arkansas (6-2)
<td class="">-24
<td class="">-24
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">16
<td class="pac10blue">24
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">27
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">42
<td class="pac10blue">5
<tr>
<td class="">S Carolina (6-2)
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="">3
<td class="">-16
<td class="gray">
<td class="accred">-3
<td class="pac10blue">5
<td class="pac10blue">51
<td class="pac10blue">2
<td class="pac10blue">18
<td class="pac10blue">11
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Auburn (4-4)
<td class="">-35
<td class="">-28
<td class="">-38
<td class="">-24
<td class="">3
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">11
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">7
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">18
<tr>
<td class="">Florida (3-5)
<td class="">-30
<td class="">-28
<td class="">-4
<td class=>
<td class="">-5
<td class="">-11
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">38
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">5
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Kentucky (2-6)
<td class="">-28
<td class=>
<td class="">-9
<td class=>
<td class="">-51
<td class=>
<td class="">-38
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">-12
<td class="bigeastgreen">-30
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">17
<tr>
<td class="">Miss St (2-6)
<td class="">-13
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-27
<td class="">-2
<td class="">-7
<td class=>
<td class="">12
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<td class=>
<td class="pac10blue">28
<tr>
<td class="">Vanderbilt (2-6)
<td class=>
<td class="">-34
<td class="">-5
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-18
<td class=>
<td class="">-5
<td class="">30
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
<td class="accred">-6
<td class="pac10blue">23
<tr>
<td class="">Tennessee (1-7)
<td class="">-31
<td class="">-31
<td class="">-8
<td class="">-42
<td class="">-11
<td class=>
<td class="">-10
<td class="">-3
<td class=>
<td class="">6
<td class="gray">
<td class=>
<tr>
<td class="">Ole Miss (0-8)
<td class="">-49
<td class="">-45
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-5
<td class=>
<td class="">-18
<td class=>
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-28
<td class="">23
<td class=>
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Another unbalanced year in the SEC - this is their second in a row in the single digits. Just three statistical upsets, and none of them noteworthy. Auburn had the roughest go of it, playing the 6 toughest teams in the conference, while Georgia avoided the 3 best teams in the West until meeting LSU in the championship.
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=10 class="font125 white">MtnWest 2011 - 0.0% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">TCU
<th col width="45">BoiseSt
<th col width="45">Wyom
<th col width="45">SanDSt
<th col width="45">AForce
<th col width="45">ColoSt
<th col width="45">NewMex
<th col width="45">UNLV
<tr>
<td class=>TCU (7-0)
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="pac10blue">11
<td class="pac10blue">13
<td class="pac10blue">16
<td class="pac10blue">24
<td class="pac10blue">69
<td class="pac10blue">47
<tr>
<td class="">Boise St (6-1)
<td class="">-1
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">22
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="pac10blue">11
<td class="pac10blue">50
<td class="pac10blue">45
<td class="pac10blue">27
<tr>
<td class="">Wyoming (5-2)
<td class="">-11
<td class="">-22
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">8
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">21
<td class="pac10blue">27
<tr>
<td class="">San Diego St (4-3)
<td class="">-13
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-3
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">14
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class="pac10blue">17
<tr>
<td class="">Air Force (3-4)
<td class="">-16
<td class="">-11
<td class="">-8
<td class="">-14
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">24
<td class="pac10blue">42
<td class="pac10blue">28
<tr>
<td class="">Colorado St (1-6)
<td class="">-24
<td class="">-50
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-24
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">4
<td class="bigeastgreen">-3
<tr>
<td class="">New Mexico (1-6)
<td class="">-69
<td class="">-45
<td class="">-21
<td class="">-28
<td class="">-42
<td class="">-4
<td class="gray">
<td class="bigeastgreen">7
<tr>
<td class="">UNLV (1-6)
<td class="">-47
<td class="">-27
<td class="">-27
<td class="">-17
<td class="">-28
<td class="">3
<td class="">-7
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>No upsets in the MtnWest this season, but Colorado State's loss to UNLV did create a three-way tie for last place. Even adding Boise State into the conference didn't shake things up at all.
<p>
<table align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=12 class="font125 white">SunBelt 2011 - 0.0% upsets
<tr>
<th>Conf Standings
<th col width="45">ArkSt
<th col width="45">WKU
<th col width="45">LA-Laf
<th col width="45">FlaIntl
<th col width="45">NTexas
<th col width="45">LA-Mon
<th col width="45">Troy
<th col width="45">MTSU
<th col width="45">FlaAtl
<tr>
<td class=>Arkansas St (8-0)
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">4
<td class="pac10blue">9
<td class="pac10blue">18
<td class="pac10blue">23
<td class="pac10blue">5
<td class="pac10blue">31
<td class="pac10blue">26
<td class="pac10blue">18
<tr>
<td class="">Western Kentucky (7-1)
<td class="">-4
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">19
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="pac10blue">10
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">23
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">20
<tr>
<td class="">LA-Lafayette (6-2)
<td class="">-9
<td class="">-19
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">5
<td class="pac10blue">20
<td class="pac10blue">1
<td class="pac10blue">14
<td class="pac10blue">25
<td class="pac10blue">3
<tr>
<td class="">Florida Int'l (5-3)
<td class="">-18
<td class="">-1
<td class="">-5
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">25
<td class="pac10blue">11
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">13
<td class="pac10blue">34
<tr>
<td class="">N Texas (4-4)
<td class="">-23
<td class="">-10
<td class="">-20
<td class="">-25
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">17
<td class="pac10blue">5
<td class="pac10blue">52
<td class="pac10blue">14
<tr>
<td class="">LA-Monroe (3-5)
<td class="">-5
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-1
<td class="">-11
<td class="">-17
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class="pac10blue">28
<td class="pac10blue">26
<tr>
<td class="">Troy (2-6)
<td class="">-31
<td class="">-23
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-5
<td class="">-28
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">3
<td class="pac10blue">27
<tr>
<td class="">Mid TN St (1-7)
<td class="">-26
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-25
<td class="">-13
<td class="">-52
<td class="">-28
<td class="">-3
<td class="gray">
<td class="pac10blue">24
<tr>
<td class="">Florida Atl (0-8)
<td class="">-18
<td class="">-20
<td class="">-3
<td class="">-34
<td class="">-14
<td class="">-26
<td class="">-27
<td class="">-24
<td class="gray">
</tbody>
</table>
<p>And a year after posting the most balanced conference ever at 29%, the SunBelt goes perfectly unbalanced. Fascinating.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-86928454749794261982011-12-02T13:58:00.006-05:002011-12-04T12:29:14.666-05:00Week 14 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Ohio (+3) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3ATUuneI/AAAAAAAABO4/dz99PIKjWg4/s400/mac-ohiou.png
"> v <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3Aztwh9I/AAAAAAAABPA/YB_GZLBH7qg/s400/mac-northernill.png
"><b> Northern Illinois </b></font>
<p><i>These two are pretty similar in most ways - same record, same record against the spread, same general stats... But I've gotta go with the Huskies here, if only because they've been on a bigger winning streak and lost to better teams.</i>
<p>The Call: Northern Illinois by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Northern Illinois</span><span style="color:#3333ff;"> 23-20</span></b>
<p>Maybe I should just pick all MAC games next season. I'll take the tie.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>UCLA (+31.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76tHWiZdI/AAAAAAAABGY/flIFDH1YuTg/s400/p10-ucla.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4LYltNLI/AAAAAAAABJo/rZuigm3jx1w/s400/p10-oregon.png
"><b> Oregon </b></font>
<p><i>Don't count the Bruins out of this one - sure they're coach is on his way out, and they had to file for an exemption to go to a bowl, and they lost to Arizona and Utah, and they don't really have a defense to speak of... nah, go ahead and count them out. </i>
<p>The Call: Oregon by 42
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oregon</span><span style="color:#ff0000;"> 49-31</span></b>
<p>Well, at least they covered the spread. That's something I guess.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Southern Miss </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spg76sCMuvI/AAAAAAAABNQ/kMghu9ueJ7M/s400/cusa-southernmiss.png
"> v <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spg6sSzknoI/AAAAAAAABNA/YJJq88IG77c/s400/cusa-houston.png
"><b> Houston (-13.5)</b></font>
<p><i>Listen, I know that Houston hasn't played the level of competition as some of the 1-loss teams out there vying for the last BCS title game spot, but they're still undefeated. If there was ever a year to give the little guy a shot, this is it. </i>
<p>The Call: Houston by 21
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Southern Miss 49-28</span></b>
<p>And there goes that shot. The non-BCS teams will be lucky to get someone into a BCS game this year now, costing a bunch of schools a bunch of money. Too bad.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas (+3) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwMWCG2I/AAAAAAAABB4/bzfd265F8k0/s400/b12-texas.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIF_VNIWI/AAAAAAAABDA/ZIk_xCm0XL0/s400/b12-baylor.png
"><b> Baylor</b></font>
<p><i>Will RGIII be as effective against the Longhorns as he was against the Sooners? Probably. </i>
<p>The Call: Baylor by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Baylor 48-24</span></b>
<p>Did that wrap up the Heisman for RGIII? Maybe. He has better stats than Luck and had just as horrible a team to bring up from the depths, but he does have more talent around him to work with. He's a better athlete than Richardson, but probably won't be as heavily valued by the NFL. Tough choice, but at least it'll make things interesting for the next week.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>LSU (-13.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77RgiCkyI/AAAAAAAABHQ/1Br1xC3Dj1M/s400/sec-lsu.png
"> v <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Ss5f3sI/AAAAAAAABHg/q_n3VneZ7jM/s400/sec-georgia.png
"><b> Georgia</b></font>
<p><i>The Dawgs haven't faced a team with a pulse since September, but they've started to click on both sides of the ball. The Tigers haven't faced many teams with good defense, and I'd bet that their offense has some trouble here. </i>
<p>The Call: LSU wins, but Georgia covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>LSU</span><span style="color:#ff0000;"> 42-10</span></b>
<p>Aside from the blatant SEC homer shilling from Danielson & Lundquist, this was an amazing game to watch. The thing about the LSU defense isn't that it's good at stopping the opponent, which it is, but that it's so unbelievable at completely turning the tables and setting up the offense. It's as if their Defense/Special Teams is that significant other who's intelligent, kind, good looking, and funny, and then goes way beyond that by being a great and caring partner on top of it all. Here honey, have the ball inside the 20. What, you'd like a pick 6 or return TD so you can rest a bit more? No problem. What offense wouldn't want that?
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oklahoma (+3.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74g_4puGI/AAAAAAAABEg/-lDby6D25Zo/s400/b12-oklahoma2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwSnzCoI/AAAAAAAABCA/4PQjpUklCTc/s400/b12-okstate.png
"><b> Oklahoma State</b></font>
<p><i>Both of these teams have been looking ahead to this game for a while now, and I gotta believe that the Sooners are gonna be better prepared and coming in with more of a chip on their shoulder. The Cowboys hopes of busting into the BCS are legitimate, and the ball could bounce their way, but I don't think it will. </i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Oklahoma State 44-10</span></b>
<p>Yup, that was a whuppin'. The Cowboys didn't need the ball to bounce their way, which is good because that gives them a better chance of it bouncing their way in the BCS rankings. All those SEC arguments about "no rematch" from five years ago when it was between Florida and Michigan to face #1 Ohio State? They still apply - give the Cowboys the shot.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Virginia Tech </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGGYc3RWI/AAAAAAAAA-4/d-D-uRZKXYc/s400/acc-vatech.png
"> v <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGgIBypMI/AAAAAAAABAA/9mi0KXZAGTg/s400/acc-clemson.png
"><b> Clemson (+7)</b></font>
<p><i>If you're basing this one solely on momentum, it's gotta go to the Hokies.</i>
<p>The Call: Virginia Tech by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Clemson 38-10</span></b>
<p>And that's why it's never good to base picks solely off momentum, kids. Props to the Tigers for coming back and showing that they deserve to be in a BCS game. Wonder what Spurrier thinks of that.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Michigan State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spgv5lOpV9I/AAAAAAAABKI/omLt44d-G2k/s400/b10-mist3.png
"> v <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzD9vjMI/AAAAAAAABAQ/N9E07CWpovQ/s400/b10-wisc.png
"><b> Wisconsin (-9.5)</b></font>
<p><i>That's kind of a big spread... I think the Badgers will get some measure of revenge here, but it's gonna be another close one. </i>
<p>The Call: Wisconsin wins, but Michigan State covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Wisconsin 42-39</span></b>
<p>Another solid, entertaining game. The Badgers will be a great match for the Ducks in Pasadena.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Another poor week. Just 5-3 straight up, and 2.5-5.5 against the spread. Argh. That brings the regular season totals to 140-56 straight up (71.4%), and 94.5-102.5 against the spread (47.9%). Gonna have to do better with the bowls.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-31719152396251509042011-11-25T08:39:00.005-05:002011-11-27T12:01:37.576-05:00Week 13 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Eastern Michigan </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3yx0bygI/AAAAAAAABPw/8zy7eO4OgRA/s400/mac-easternmich.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3Aztwh9I/AAAAAAAABPA/YB_GZLBH7qg/s400/mac-northernill.png
"><b> Northern Illinois (-18.5)</b></font>
<p><i>Let's start out in the MAC again, just because. There doesn't seem to be that big of a difference between the Eagles and the Huskies. The Huskies are on a 6-game winning streak though, while the Eagles have lost two of their last three. We'll take a shot here - </i>
<p>The Call: Northern Illinois wins, but Eastern Michigan covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Northern Illinois 18-12</span></b>
<p>Oh MAC, where have you been all my picking life?
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Iowa (+9.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG_91ul_I/AAAAAAAABBQ/w3zBl-S1Hew/s400/b10-iowa.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75r4sT-vI/AAAAAAAABEw/Hz_qMipwyHA/s400/b12-nebraska3.png
"><b> Nebraska</b></font>
<p><i>The Hawkeyes have quietly put together another solid season, going 7-4, while the Huskers have seen their chances at a first Big10 title slip away these last few weeks. Not that they don't have anything to play for, but I get the feeling the boys in red are in for a let down.</i>
<p>The Call: Iowa by 4
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Nebraska 20-7</span></b>
<p>Or not. Both of these two will go to decent bowls, and their seasons weren't bad - just not what they'd hoped for.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Arkansas </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77b25YQpI/AAAAAAAABIA/2Kfz-VHoIhE/s400/sec-arkansas.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77RgiCkyI/AAAAAAAABHQ/1Br1xC3Dj1M/s400/sec-lsu.png
"><b> LSU (-12)</b></font>
<p><i>I know, I know - I've been saying all year how I think the Razorbacks are overrated. But really, they've won all the games they should've in the SEC, and their non-conference schedule was weak. Now's their chance to prove me wrong. </i>
<p>The Call: LSU by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>LSU 41-17</span></b>
<p>And they don't. Textbook game by the Tigers, who have basically sewn up a trip to the title game. Even losing to Georgia next week wouldn't derail their chances, with as good as they've been. Arkansas figures to drop in the rankings, but a January 1 bowl game against the Big10 should be a good game.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Boston College </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGg_5p_JI/AAAAAAAABAI/XaWaAieEwB4/s400/acc-bc.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGV-eZEgI/AAAAAAAAA_Y/evdGRCM-W2g/s400/acc-miami.png
"><b> Miami (-14.5)</b></font>
<p><i>The Eagles have had their issues this year, notching only three wins, none of them against anyone good. The Canes have been a bit erratic, but they've played solid even in games they've lost lately. I think they can take this one comfortably. </i>
<p>The Call: Miami by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Boston College 24-17</span></b>
<p>If you can figure out the Canes, let me know. I have no idea apparently.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Colorado </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIFojkK-I/AAAAAAAABC4/sjAoZu9xWCU/s400/b12-colorado.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG9pq6gwWI/AAAAAAAABIg/6uIUKbx4G7g/s400/mtnw-utah.png
"><b> Utah (-22)</b></font>
<p><i>The Utes have been on a tear their last four games, and are in a position to take the Pac12 south if the chips fall their way. The Buffs came away with one of the more improbable wins of the season when they took down Arizona a couple of weeks ago, but that was an abberation. That's kind of a big spread though...</i>
<p>The Call: Utah by 24
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Colorado 17-14</span></b>
<p>And Utah lets its chance at a Pac12 South title go down the drain against the worst team in the conference. That one'll sting for a while. Props to Colorado for not giving up on the season though.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Michigan State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spgv5lOpV9I/AAAAAAAABKI/omLt44d-G2k/s400/b10-mist3.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0rXHrOI/AAAAAAAABAw/WQ4ob8mhkC0/s400/b10-nwest.png
"><b> Northwestern (+6)</b></font>
<p><i>I know the Wildcats upset Nebraska a couple of weeks ago, and they're playing better than the did the first half of the season, but the Spartans are the class of the Big10 this season, and won't lose focus before playing for the championship next week.</i>
<p>The Call: Michigan State by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Michigan State 31-17</span></b>
<p>The rematch with Wisconsin next week should be a doozy.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Ohio State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0XK5J2I/AAAAAAAABAo/hdD5wn6vQYA/s400/b10-ohiost.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG_jotbuI/AAAAAAAABBI/LCyvh0cFVjw/s400/b10-michigan.png
"><b> Michigan (-7.5)</b></font>
<p><i>Sure on paper the Wolverines have this one sewn up, but that's what rivalries are for. Losing the last 7 games in a series can do something to your game, throw you off a bit, get into your head... But I think they'll still have enough to close out the Bucks, who are shaky this season. </i>
<p>The Call: Michigan by 9
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Michigan </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">40-34</span></b>
<p>Ah... though it did make for an exciting finish, that non-TD at the end kept the Wolverines from covering the spread. I don't think they minded though, and it's little consolation to the Buckeyes.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Georgia (-6) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Ss5f3sI/AAAAAAAABHg/q_n3VneZ7jM/s400/sec-georgia.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGXTPpltI/AAAAAAAAA_o/ugs9Z4mBhqs/s400/acc-gatech.png
"><b> Georgia Tech</b></font>
<p><i>The Yellow Jackets started strong this season, but they've stumbled since mid-October. The Dawgs are playing as well as nearly any team out there right now though, and I think this one could get out of hand quickly.</i>
<p>The Call: Georgia by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia 31-17</span></b>
<p>Not a blowout, but close. The Dawgs pretty much had the upper hand all day, and the Jackets couldn't get anything going through the air.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Virginia Tech </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGHgbycyI/AAAAAAAAA_A/K1fzH2OIcJI/s400/acc-virginia.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGGYc3RWI/AAAAAAAAA-4/d-D-uRZKXYc/s400/acc-vatech.png
"><b> Virginia (+4)</b></font>
<p><i>The Cavaliers have put together a fine season at 8-3, and they lost some games they should've won. Do they have enough to take down the Hokies and win the Coastal division title? Yes, they do. Can they? I have my doubts...</i>
<p>The Call: Virginia Tech by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Virginia Tech 38-0</span></b>
<p>That was a beatdown, and should pump the Hokies up for their rematch with Clemson next week.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Penn State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGz3TP0rI/AAAAAAAABAg/rdIsqCDcofs/s400/b10-pennst.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzD9vjMI/AAAAAAAABAQ/N9E07CWpovQ/s400/b10-wisc.png
"><b> Wisconsin (-14.5)</b></font>
<p><i>I still think the Badgers are one of the teams out there that matches up well with almost anybody. The Nittany Lions are still struggling on offense, and that'll be the difference here. The over/under is at 49 - take the under.</i>
<p>The Call: Wisconsin by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Wisconsin 45-7</span></b>
<p>Who knew the Penn State D would be so inept? I'll count this as a split, since I was wrong on the over/under.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Alabama </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77cHf8ndI/AAAAAAAABII/EYGzICBpVTQ/s400/sec-alabama2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77bisFcpI/AAAAAAAABH4/3TkuXSvbp2E/s400/sec-auburn2.png
"><b> Auburn (+21)</b></font>
<p><i>This one screams Tide all over it, but why do I get the feeling that it's going to be closer than a 3TD spread...?</i>
<p>The Call: Alabama wins, but Auburn covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Alabama </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">42-14</span></b>
<p>No, sorry - that screaming was coming from Auburn side. My bad.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Missouri </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH5qbl9lI/AAAAAAAABCY/_rozvLRVhtI/s400/b12-mizzou.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH6cG4ZiI/AAAAAAAABCo/UYOvGUNTlQs/s400/b12-kansas.png
"><b> Kansas (+25.5)</b></font>
<p>The Tigers are playing well, and the Jayhawks... depending on your definition of the word, you could say that their either "playing" or they're not.
<p>The Call: Missouri by 31
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Missouri </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">24-10</span></b>
<p>That's what happens when you don't play well in the first half and put yourself in a hole - you don't cover the spread against a easy team.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Duke (+13) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGZFE93uI/AAAAAAAAA_4/f_d5iq5-of4/s400/acc-duke.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGJBYqHCI/AAAAAAAAA_Q/b5-oW8yXuIg/s400/acc-unc.png
"><b> North Carolina</b></font>
<p><i>The Blue Devils are having yet another down season, but I think they have the tools to make this one close. Pulling the trigger.</i>
<p>The Call: Duke by 3
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>North Carolina 37-21</span></b>
<p>Misfire. Damn.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oregon State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76Z4T4iQI/AAAAAAAABF4/QLkjahqZ4rw/s400/p10-oregonst.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4LYltNLI/AAAAAAAABJo/rZuigm3jx1w/s400/p10-oregon.png
"><b> Oregon (-27.5) </b></font>
<p><i>After their letdown last week, the Ducks need this one to play in the Pac12 title game next week. The Beavers aren't going bowling, so all they can do it play the spoiler... that's some mighty motivation... </i>
<p>The Call: Oregon wins, but Oregon State covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oregon </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">49-21</span></b>
<p>The Ducks are flying again, and they should have no problem with UCLA next week. The matchup with either Michigan State or Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl should be a solid game.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Florida State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGYZsLFVI/AAAAAAAAA_w/pzjv0T5GbH4/s400/acc-floridast.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77SoBgvPI/AAAAAAAABHo/rBJBLeV_BgY/s400/sec-florida.png
"><b> Florida (+2.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Neither of these two had the season they imagined, but only one gets a bit of redemption in their last regular season game. </i>
<p>The Call: Florida State by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Florida State 21-7</span></b>
<p>And that was a game that neither one deserved to win. Really.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Mississippi </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77IdzGNlI/AAAAAAAABHA/-ZKTjeykIF4/s400/sec-olemiss.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77ItIqXRI/AAAAAAAABHI/U0VYyzQzI44/s400/sec-missst.png
"><b> Mississippi State (-17) </b></font>
<p><i>Hmmm... that's a big spread, but the Rebels have been pretty bad this season... Yeah, I can't put this one into blowout territory.</i>
<p>The Call: Mississippi State wins, but Mississippi covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Mississippi State </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">31-3</span></b>
<p>Ole Miss just can't catch a break. Maybe a new coach will help. Whoever gets to play Mississippi State in their bowl game should be thankful.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Washington State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76sJWFUfI/AAAAAAAABGA/2rNOkvUXV7A/s400/p10-washst.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76sd2zROI/AAAAAAAABGI/12ctbtIZT0o/s400/p10-wash.png
"><b> Washington (-8.5)</b></font>
<p><i>Now that's a better spread between two in-state rivals who aren't very good.</i>
<p>The Call: Washington by 12
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Washington 38-21</span></b>
<p>That'll probably be Paul Wulff's job, and while Sarkisian is safe, he needs to do better than 7-5.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Clemson (+3.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGgIBypMI/AAAAAAAABAA/9mi0KXZAGTg/s400/acc-clemson.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77H67EheI/AAAAAAAABG4/Rn0dILoC2jc/s400/sec-southcar2.png
"><b> South Carolina</b></font>
<p><i>Ah, a rivalry game between two teams that are pretty good - how refreshing. The Tigers are already in the ACC championship game, and the Gamecocks came pretty close to the SEC championship game for a second straight season. I think this might be pretty close, but I think last week's loss to NC State was an abberation - the Tigers will come out on top. </i>
<p>The Call: Clemson by 6
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>South Carolina 34-13</span></b>
<p>The Gamecocks have really come back after losing their RB & QB - props to them. The Tigers are gonna need some help finishing...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Notre Dame </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG_X7BdXpI/AAAAAAAABIw/fLN5Up9wsbE/s400/indy-notredame.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76ttmx0tI/AAAAAAAABGg/zqWh7t8KAeU/s400/p10-stanford.png
"><b> Stanford (-7)</b></font>
<p><i>The Fighting Irish are pretty well out of the BCS bowl race at 8-3, but 9-3 with wins over Michigan State and Stanford will look pretty good to another solid bowl. The Cardinal are hoping for the Fiesta, though with some well-placed chaos, some other BCS chips might fall their way... a win over the Irish will bolster their case. </i>
<p>The Call: Stanford by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Stanford 28-14</span></b>
<p>Solid finish for the Cardinal, but the Irish are really wanting those first two games of the season back.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>UCLA </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76tHWiZdI/AAAAAAAABGY/flIFDH1YuTg/s400/p10-ucla.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4K9Hfi3I/AAAAAAAABJg/WKR3A5FrhSk/s400/p10-usc.png
"><b> USC (-16)</b></font>
<p><i>The Trojans are coming off of a big win over Oregon, and have too much talent for the Bruins to keep up. And the Trojans are 7-4 against the spread this season, which is better than they usually are. The Bruins are 6-5 on the season, and even though they're probably playing for Rick Neuheisel's job, it's not going to be enough. </i>
<p>The Call: USC by 18
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>USC 50-0</span></b>
<p>Yikes, that was some domination there. Not a much bigger statement about who's the top team in the Pac12 South can be made.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Lotsa picks there. A solid 15-5 straight up, and 10-11 against the spread & with the one over/under pick. Still below average there.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-31151194041643561142011-11-18T19:14:00.004-05:002011-11-20T12:19:48.075-05:00Week 12 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Toldeo (-14.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw2_jPT-UI/AAAAAAAABOo/M6PljoVMbqM/s400/mac-toledo.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3LgGf6EI/AAAAAAAABPg/Evr2pKYzmrA/s400/mac-centralmich.png
"><b> Central Michigan</b></font>
<p><i>Yeah, picking a MAC game worked for me last weekend, and I need all the help I can get this season. </i>
<p>The Call: Toledo by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Toledo 44-17</span></b>
<p>Hmmm... maybe I just need to pick MAC games exclusively...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oklahoma State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwSnzCoI/AAAAAAAABCA/4PQjpUklCTc/s400/b12-okstate.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH65r4_HI/AAAAAAAABCw/U6BFWdjuXlU/s400/b12-iowast.png
"><b> Iowa State (+27)</b></font>
<p><i>The Cowboys are on a roll, and if they lose it's not going to be this one. </i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma State by 31
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Iowa State 37-31</span></b>
<p>Or maybe it will be. That lack of D turns into a huge liability when the turnover battle starts to go against you. The Cowboys aren't out of it though, with all the other shenanigans that happened this weekend.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Kansas (+31) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH6cG4ZiI/AAAAAAAABCo/UYOvGUNTlQs/s400/b12-kansas.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHvjqR43I/AAAAAAAABBw/LbjVXIRER5I/s400/b12-txa%26m.png
"><b> Texas A&M</b></font>
<p><i>31? I know it's the Jayhawks, but it's the Aggies too.</i>
<p>The Call: Texas A&M wins, but Kansas covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Texas A&M </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">61-7</span></b>
<p>But it's more the Jayhawks.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Nebraska </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75r4sT-vI/AAAAAAAABEw/Hz_qMipwyHA/s400/b12-nebraska3.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG_jotbuI/AAAAAAAABBI/LCyvh0cFVjw/s400/b10-michigan.png
"><b>Michigan (-3.5)</b></font>
<p><i>This one's way too tough to call. I shouldn't be. But how do you not with these two?</i>
<p>The Call: Nebraska by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Michigan 45-17</span></b>
<p>Eh, missed. Looks like the Huskers inaugural season in the Big10 isn't going to end the way they'd hoped, but it's still a solid year. The Wolverines will be favorites against the Buckeyes next week, and a win should take the sting out of losing the division to Michigan State a bit.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Kentucky </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77R-O4zKI/AAAAAAAABHY/5FpckzaLjUw/s400/sec-kentucky.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Ss5f3sI/AAAAAAAABHg/q_n3VneZ7jM/s400/sec-georgia.png
"><b> Georgia (-30.5)</b></font>
<p><i>Saw a stat today that the Dawgs, as a possible division champ, has played the easiest SEC schedule of any division champ since 2000. That might give some worries, but the Wildcats would seem to be the status quo. </i>
<p>The Call: Georgia wins, but Kentucky covers the spread.
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia 19-10</span></b>
<p>Not the prettiest performance, but it'll get the job done for the Dawgs. I give them a decent shot in the SEC title game.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Maryland (+10) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGWZEiR0I/AAAAAAAAA_g/fepOLlrHF50/s400/acc-maryland.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGFq5C0SI/AAAAAAAAA-w/OVsId_nKPkM/s400/acc-wakeforest.png
"><b> Wake Forest</b></font>
<p><i>This just isn't the Terrapins' year. </i>
<p>The Call: Wake Forest by 17.
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Wake Forest 31-10</span></b>
<p>Ralph Friedgen must be laughing his ass off right now.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Miami (+1) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGV-eZEgI/AAAAAAAAA_Y/evdGRCM-W2g/s400/acc-miami.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIar3TEOI/AAAAAAAABDY/DfuNFfwYEr0/s400/be-usf.png
"><b> South Florida</b></font>
<p><i>Another one that's tough but had to be picked. Similar records, these two, but the Bulls are on the way up, winning their last 4. The Canes have dropped 3 of 4, but I still think they'll have some in the tank for this one.</i>
<p>The Call: Miami by 3
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Miami 6-3</span></b>
<p>Barely, but I'll take it. Not the season the Canes had hoped for, but considering the turmoil their program is going through, it's better than could be expected.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Penn State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGz3TP0rI/AAAAAAAABAg/rdIsqCDcofs/s400/b10-pennst.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0XK5J2I/AAAAAAAABAo/hdD5wn6vQYA/s400/b10-ohiost.png
"><b> Ohio State (-6.5)</b></font>
<p><i>The Nittany Lions are still reeling, but they're more consistent than the Buckeyes this year. </i>
<p>The Call: Penn State by 3
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Penn State 20-14</span></b>
<p>Yup. They needed that one. Next weeks' game against Wisconsin for the division title is going to be a dogfight, and they won't be favored, but they'll take it this week.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Vanderbilt </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Hem2liI/AAAAAAAABGo/zmLJA5TT4Us/s400/sec-vandy.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa5JXT24pI/AAAAAAAABJw/BqJmAFyDQFE/s400/sec-tenn.png
"><b> Tennessee (+1.5)</b></font>
<p><i>The Vols at home are underdogs to the Commodores... If there was one that the 'Dores ever NEEDED to win, it was this one.</i>
<p>The Call: Tennessee by 4
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Tennessee 27-21</span></b>
<p>And the Vols pull it out at the end. One more against Kentucky and they become one of the least intimidating bowl teams ever.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oklahoma </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74g_4puGI/AAAAAAAABEg/-lDby6D25Zo/s400/b12-oklahoma2.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIF_VNIWI/AAAAAAAABDA/ZIk_xCm0XL0/s400/b12-baylor.png
"><b> Baylor (+15.5)</b></font>
<p><i>Everyone has been arguing this week whether Alabama or Oregon deserve a rematch with LSU, but Oklahoma is right in the thick of things, and a win in two weeks would give them quite the argument. Pedal to the metal. </i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma by 28
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Baylor 45-38</span></b>
<p>And that's a crash into a tree. Not as unexplainable as the loss to Texas Tech, but I'll be Stoops wishes he could have that timeout back. That was a major error that cost his team a shot at the BCS title game.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>USC (+14.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4K9Hfi3I/AAAAAAAABJg/WKR3A5FrhSk/s400/p10-usc.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4LYltNLI/AAAAAAAABJo/rZuigm3jx1w/s400/p10-oregon.png
"><b> Oregon</b></font>
<p><i>Solid matchup here. The Trojans are gonna give the Ducks a good game, but I don't think they'll have enough. </i>
<p>The Call: Oregon wins, but USC covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>USC </span><span style="color:#33cc00;">38-35</span></b>
<p>Another 30 seconds on the clock and they wouldn't have had enough - that's called just squeaking by. But it's a win, and there's probably a lot of teams thankful that the Trojans aren't eligible for a bowl, as tough as they're playing lately. Tough one for the Ducks, who just needed a better first half. They'll still probably get by Oregon State to make the first Pac12 championship game, but the Rose Bowl is the only option now.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Much better this week, which is interesting considering all the chaos. 7-4 both straight up and against the spread, which I'll take. So to recap the season with two weeks before the bowls, a solid 113-44 (72%) straight up. Not so great against the spread, 75-82 (48%), which loses money. Still within breaking even distance though, so at least that's something.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-21367757687028933122011-11-12T09:41:00.005-05:002011-11-18T19:14:05.075-05:00Week 11 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas (-1.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwMWCG2I/AAAAAAAABB4/bzfd265F8k0/s400/b12-texas.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH5qbl9lI/AAAAAAAABCY/_rozvLRVhtI/s400/b12-mizzou.png
"><b> Missouri </b></font>
<p><i>The Longhorns are slowly working their way back up the mountain, while the Tigers have been inconsistent all season. The Tigers play better at home, but at basically even I think they'll need a few good bounces for things to go their way.</i>
<p>The Call: Texas by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Missouri 17-5</span></b>
<p>Ooohhh... this is gonna be a rough week picking. The Tigers got those bounces and were able to control things. Props.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Wake Forest </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGFq5C0SI/AAAAAAAAA-w/OVsId_nKPkM/s400/acc-wakeforest.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGgIBypMI/AAAAAAAABAA/9mi0KXZAGTg/s400/acc-clemson.png
"><b> Clemson (-16.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Last time out the Tigers lost to Georgia Tech to break their undefeated season. They've had two weeks to get over it, and I think it was more of a blip than an exposure. The Demon Deacons were looking good at 5-2 just a few weeks ago, but two straight losses have them reeling a bit. This isn't a matchup that favors them.</i>
<p>The Call: Clemson by 21
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Clemson </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">31-28</span></b>
<p>And yet the Demon Deacons were able to keep things close despite being outgained by 200 yards. Those three turnovers they got helped, but the Tigers kept things on track.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Michigan State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spgv5lOpV9I/AAAAAAAABKI/omLt44d-G2k/s400/b10-mist3.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG_91ul_I/AAAAAAAABBQ/w3zBl-S1Hew/s400/b10-iowa.png
"><b> Iowa (+2.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Hawkeyes had a solid win over a good Michigan team last week, and could throw a huge monkeywrench into their Big10 division with a win. The Spartans rebounded from their loss to Nebraska with a lackluster performance against Minnesota. This spread is about right, but that makes it a bit tougher... When uncertain go with Chaos in November.</i>
<p>The Call: Iowa by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Michigan State 37-21</span></b>
<p>This isn't the chaos I was looking for... Spartans back on top.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Florida (+3) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77SoBgvPI/AAAAAAAABHo/rBJBLeV_BgY/s400/sec-florida.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77H67EheI/AAAAAAAABG4/Rn0dILoC2jc/s400/sec-southcar2.png
"><b> South Carolina</b></font>
<p><i>As far as the SEC East goes, this is one of two that could determine the champion today. The Gamecocks are handling their adversity much better than I thought they would, and that's with losing to Arkansas by 16 last week. The Gators haven't covered a spread since September, and this one isn't at home, but I think they'll have enough in the tank to get it done on the road.</i>
<p>The Call: Florida by 4
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>South Carolina 17-12</span></b>
<p>So the Gators are 3-5 in the SEC and will need the game against Furman next week to become bowl eligible... Not the drop off that was expected this season. The Gamecocks are able to hang in there, but their time will run out next week when UGA beats Kentucky.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oklahoma State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwSnzCoI/AAAAAAAABCA/4PQjpUklCTc/s400/b12-okstate.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74hFHhTYI/AAAAAAAABEo/gYy1nEzy3xU/s400/b12-txtech2.png
"><b> Texas Tech (+20)</b></font>
<p><i>Can the Red Raiders knock off another top-5 team from the state just north? Yes, but I'm still having a hard time figuring out how they beat Oklahoma. That was one of those games where everything fell into place for them, and to do it again, especially in the same season, would be near-miraculous. Covering the spread however... Nah.</i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma State by 24
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma 66-6</span></b>
<p>Yeah, I'm a believer in the Cowboys now. The finale against the Sooners is gonna be monstrous.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Buffalo (+3.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3MC7NPiI/AAAAAAAABPo/dHxv_Y52yRI/s400/mac-buffalo.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3yx0bygI/AAAAAAAABPw/8zy7eO4OgRA/s400/mac-easternmich.png
"><b> Eastern Michigan</b></font>
<p><i>Eh, why not? </i>
<p>The Call: Eastern Michigan by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Eastern Michigan 30-17</span></b>
<p>Yeah, I needed that one. Bad.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Arizona </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76YT8deGI/AAAAAAAABFY/4Ri37Sg65vw/s400/p10-arizona.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIFojkK-I/AAAAAAAABC4/sjAoZu9xWCU/s400/b12-colorado.png
"><b> Colorado (+10)</b></font>
<p><i>The Buffs have had some huge spreads in their favor in the last 6 weeks, but haven't been able to cover any of them. Ten points is the fewest they've gotten in a long while, which doesn't bode well. The Wildcats have had a rough go of it, the only bright spot being their win over UCLA a few weeks back. But I think they still have the personnel to get it done.</i>
<p>The Call: Arizona by 13
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Colorado 48-29</span></b>
<p>Or not. The Wildcats need to make a big hire soon for a new head coach that's gonna turn their program around, because they're going nowhere fast. Solid first win in the Pac12 for the Buffs, but they need to do better themselves.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Miami (+9.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGV-eZEgI/AAAAAAAAA_Y/evdGRCM-W2g/s400/acc-miami.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGYZsLFVI/AAAAAAAAA_w/pzjv0T5GbH4/s400/acc-floridast.png
"><b> Florida State </b></font>
<p><i>A tricky one here. The Canes have been up and down this season, posting both bad losses and good wins. The Seminoles are back on track after their 3-game losing streak that dropped them out of the top 25. I think the Seminoles are sturdier and less mistake prone right now, and their D should be able to get them through.</i>
<p>The Call: Florida State by 14
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Florida State </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">23-19</span></b>
<p>Ah, that was close - thought they could keep the cover there at the end.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Auburn </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77bisFcpI/AAAAAAAABH4/3TkuXSvbp2E/s400/sec-auburn2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Ss5f3sI/AAAAAAAABHg/q_n3VneZ7jM/s400/sec-georgia.png
"><b> Georgia (-12) </b></font>
<p><i>That spread seems awfully big... The Dawgs can clinch a trip to the SEC Championship game today if things fall their way, but the Tigers always present a tough matchup. They're on a hot streak though, and I think Richt will pull out all the stops (as much as he can). </i>
<p>The Call: Georgia wins, but Auburn covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">45-7</span></b>
<p>What Tigers team was that? Yikes. The Dawgs are on a tear and should be able to finish the next two weeks strong.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas A&M (-5.5)</b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHvjqR43I/AAAAAAAABBw/LbjVXIRER5I/s400/b12-txa%26m.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH6H518oI/AAAAAAAABCg/wveskf9W7sA/s400/b12-ksstate.png
"><b> Kansas State</b></font>
<p><i>So the Wildcats go from undefeated two weeks ago to getting points at home from a 5-4 team? I don't think so.</i>
<p>The Call: Kansas State by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Kansas State 53-50</span></b>
<p>Doozy of a game there. Good to see.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>TCU (+16)</b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG9pIkyJKI/AAAAAAAABIY/TtuLi3ZHa5s/s400/mtnw-tcu.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG9pyhjU6I/AAAAAAAABIo/eUzVjtUXpto/s400/wac-boisest.png
"><b> Boise State</b></font>
<p><i>The Horned Frogs are solid, but not up to their usual standards. The Broncos are. This one could be close, but I doubt it.</i>
<p>The Call: Boise State by 21
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>TCU 36-35</span></b>
<p>Maybe some karma going on there after that phantom pass interference call that kept the Broncos' last drive going. But the Horned Frogs came to play, and they regained a bit of their swagger. The Broncos drop one at the end for the second season in a row, so now the only real possibility for a BCS-buster is going to be Houston.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Washington </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76sd2zROI/AAAAAAAABGI/12ctbtIZT0o/s400/p10-wash.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4K9Hfi3I/AAAAAAAABJg/WKR3A5FrhSk/s400/p10-usc.png
"><b> USC (-11.5)</b></font>
<p><i>The Trojans are 2-2 in covering double-digit spreads this season, but those two wins were against Colorado and Syracuse. The Huskies are going to be a lot tougher, and while I think they'll be able to put points on the board, their D just isn't going to be enough against Barkley & Woods.</i>
<p>The Call: USC wins, but Washington covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>USC </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">40-17</span></b>
<p>Woods had a quiet day, but the Trojans' running game has jumped to life these last few weeks. That matchup with Oregon next week just got a whole lot more interesting. The Huskies just didn't get anything going - too many three and outs, too many special teams lapses, too many penalties... Not their best effort.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Tennessee </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa5JXT24pI/AAAAAAAABJw/BqJmAFyDQFE/s400/sec-tenn.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77b25YQpI/AAAAAAAABIA/2Kfz-VHoIhE/s400/sec-arkansas.png
"><b> Arkansas (-14.5)</b></font>
<p><i>Yeah, I still think the Razorbacks are overrated. But the Vols won't be able to do anything to dispel that notion.</i>
<p>The Call: Arkansas by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Arkansas 49-7</span></b>
<p>So the Vols are winless in the SEC, huh? Pathetic that they can still make it to a bowl if they beat Kentucky and Vandy. I'm starting to come around to the Razorbacks, but I wouldn't favor them against anyone else in the Top10.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Western Kentucky </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp1BS8NbsVI/AAAAAAAABQQ/46B9jCZAVfc/s400/sunbelt-westernky.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77RgiCkyI/AAAAAAAABHQ/1Br1xC3Dj1M/s400/sec-lsu.png
"><b> LSU (-41.5)</b></font>
<p><i>That's a really big spread, especially considering the Hilltoppers have won five straight. Is the Tigers D good enough to hold them scoreless? Of course. Is the Tigers O good enough to put up 42+? Yes, they've topped that three times this season and scored 35+ against four others, others that are better. Throw in the fact that their D can score, and I'd say that a pretty safe bet.</i>
<p>The Call: LSU by 45
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>LSU </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">42-9</span></b>
<p>Aw, jeez. Really? I know they're not trying to run the score up, and sometimes teams start slow, but c'mon.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Alabama (-17.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77cHf8ndI/AAAAAAAABII/EYGzICBpVTQ/s400/sec-alabama2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77ItIqXRI/AAAAAAAABHI/U0VYyzQzI44/s400/sec-missst.png
"><b> Mississippi State</b></font>
<p><i>The Bulldogs are much worse than their 5-4 record would indicate - they've beaten Kentucky and 4 cupcakes. This one will be over 20 minutes in.</i>
<p>The Call: Alabama by 35
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Alabama </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">24-7</span></b>
<p>That wasn't good, on either side. I'm starting to doubt that Bama is the best 1-loss team out there...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oregon </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4LYltNLI/AAAAAAAABJo/rZuigm3jx1w/s400/p10-oregon.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76ttmx0tI/AAAAAAAABGg/zqWh7t8KAeU/s400/p10-stanford.png
"><b> Stanford (-3)</b></font>
<p><i>This one should be a good game, if only just for the difference in styles. The Ducks are rolling after dropping their first game to LSU, which is retrospect isn't that bad of a loss at all. And you gotta believe that last year's game when they were up big in the first quarter and then blew it will be at the forefront of the Cardinal's mind. They won't let that happen again, and controlling the line should help them keep their foot on the gas the whole time. </i>
<p>The Call: Stanford by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Oregon 53-30</span></b>
<p>And that's what happens when you turn the ball over, folks. The Ducks put together a great all around effort and managed to mix-up Luck and the Cardinal. They probably won't get into the title game, but the Rose Bowl is a nice consolation.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Ugly weekend. 10-6 straight up, and a pathetic 4-12 against the spread. Just gotta forget it and bounce back.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-76605014451808928922011-11-04T14:12:00.005-04:002011-11-09T07:02:20.978-05:00Week 10 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Minnesota (+27.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG-3F1WvI/AAAAAAAABA4/xtF4JsK_AD0/s400/b10-minn.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spgv5lOpV9I/AAAAAAAABKI/omLt44d-G2k/s400/b10-mist3.png
"><b> Michigan State </b></font>
<p>Okay, no more of this calling for the favorite. Top 10 teams have started falling fast and heavy, so we're going to make some calculated upset calls this week. Starting with the Spartans & Golden Gophers. No, Minnesota isn't going to win this one, but that's a pretty big spread. The Spartans are only averaging 26 points per game, and except for their blanking at Michigan the Golden Gophers are averaging over 20ppg themselves. I could get ugly fast, but I don't think it'll stay that way.
<p>The Call: Michigan State wins, but Minnesota covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Michigan State 31-24</span></b>
<p>I love it when the numbers work out. The Spartans luster has dulled a bit, but they're still in the running for a BCS bowl spot.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas Tech </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74hFHhTYI/AAAAAAAABEo/gYy1nEzy3xU/s400/b12-txtech2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwMWCG2I/AAAAAAAABB4/bzfd265F8k0/s400/b12-texas.png
"><b> Texas (-14) </b></font>
<p>The Red Raiders were rolling along, doing well offensively until last week's 1TD abomination against Iowa State - I think they'll find their mojo again this week, though maybe not as much. The Longhorns are a solid 5-2 on the season though they haven't really beaten anyone of note. I don't know that I'm ready to give this one to the boys from Lubbock just yet, but I think it'll be a close one.
<p>The Call: Texas wins, but Texas Tech covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Texas </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">52-20</span></b>
<p>I'd bet that Longhorn fans would take 6-2 at the beginning of the season, considering how last season went. That win over Oklahoma is looking more and more like lightning in a bottle for the Red Raiders...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Michigan </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG_jotbuI/AAAAAAAABBI/LCyvh0cFVjw/s400/b10-michigan.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG_91ul_I/AAAAAAAABBQ/w3zBl-S1Hew/s400/b10-iowa.png
"><b> Iowa (+3.5) </b></font>
<p>An interesting one here. The Wolverines are a stellar 7-1, but they have the toughest games of their schedule coming up in November. Still they can put points on the board, and this year's Hawkeye team isn't as good defensively as they've been in the more recent past.
<p>The Call: Michigan by 9
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Iowa 24-16</span></b>
<p>Are the Wolverines regressing, or is it just me? Solid W for the Hawkeyes, who are turning things around.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>New Mexico State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp1EJESEJ9I/AAAAAAAABR4/ma7ylGccHx0/s400/wac-newmexicost.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Ss5f3sI/AAAAAAAABHg/q_n3VneZ7jM/s400/sec-georgia.png
"><b> Georgia (-32) </b></font>
<p>Normally I wouldn't call this one, but Georgia is having some personnel issues and the Aggies have been decent at putting points on the board this season (as well as covering the spread in their last five games).
<p>The Call: Georgia wins, but New Mexico State covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">63-16</span></b>
<p>Yeah, I guess Aaron Murray doesn't need RB's sometimes. The Dawgs are on a roll, to say the least.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Duke (+15.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGZFE93uI/AAAAAAAAA_4/f_d5iq5-of4/s400/acc-duke.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGV-eZEgI/AAAAAAAAA_Y/evdGRCM-W2g/s400/acc-miami.png
"><b> Miami </b></font>
<p>The Blue Devils were going fine there for a while, but losing their last three has put them at 3-5 on the year (though they have been 5-3 against the spread...) Miami is a mystery, losing when they should win and winning when they might not... Tough call this one.
<p>The Call: Miami wins, but Duke covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Miami </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">49-14</span></b>
<p>Yeah, thought the Dukies could hang. They were so close to bowling a month ago, but it's not to be this season. Good win for the Canes - they needed it and I'm sure will take what they can get this year.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Northwestern </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0rXHrOI/AAAAAAAABAw/WQ4ob8mhkC0/s400/b10-nwest.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75r4sT-vI/AAAAAAAABEw/Hz_qMipwyHA/s400/b12-nebraska3.png
"><b> Nebraska (-17.5) </b></font>
<p>Okay, enough of these field goals - let's go for a TD.
<p>The Call: Nebraska by 24
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Northwestern 28-25</span></b>
<p>Ouch - stuffed at the line. That's gonna be rough not only on the Huskers but on the Big10 too... I guess it's not that surprising, since the Wildcats have a history of knocking off a top team every season or so.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas A&M </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHvjqR43I/AAAAAAAABBw/LbjVXIRER5I/s400/b12-txa%26m.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74g_4puGI/AAAAAAAABEg/-lDby6D25Zo/s400/b12-oklahoma2.png
"><b> Oklahoma (-13.5) </b></font>
<p>And you thought the Aggies had trouble with Missouri & Arkansas...
<p>The Call: Oklahoma by 21
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma 41-25</span></b>
<p>The Sooners are neck and neck with Alabama for the top of the 1-loss squad, if you ask me.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Stanford (-21) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76ttmx0tI/AAAAAAAABGg/zqWh7t8KAeU/s400/p10-stanford.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76Z4T4iQI/AAAAAAAABF4/QLkjahqZ4rw/s400/p10-oregonst.png
"><b> Oregon State </b></font>
<p>The Cardinal should be able to get back to their big wins, while the Beavers just need to do something. Not the week to get back on the horse...
<p>The Call: Stanford by 27
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Stanford 38-13</span></b>
<p>The Cardinal didn't want to go into the game with Oregon with injuries, but they can probably handle the hits (as Oregon has this season). And it's more important to be ready to play in January.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Utah (+3.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG9pq6gwWI/AAAAAAAABIg/6uIUKbx4G7g/s400/mtnw-utah.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76YT8deGI/AAAAAAAABFY/4Ri37Sg65vw/s400/p10-arizona.png
"><b> Arizona </b></font>
<p>Well the Utes finally won a Pac12 game, and Arizona is finally into an easy slate of games after a tough few months. I think the Wildcats will get it done at home.
<p>The Call: Arizona by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Utah 34-21</span></b>
<p>Nope. The Wildcats are quite dysfunctional, unfortunately. The Utes didn't really need that one, since they have three of the worst teams in the Pac12 to finish out the year, but an 8-4 finish is looking mighty fine should they run the table.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>South Carolina </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77H67EheI/AAAAAAAABG4/Rn0dILoC2jc/s400/sec-southcar2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77b25YQpI/AAAAAAAABIA/2Kfz-VHoIhE/s400/sec-arkansas.png
"><b> Arkansas (-5) </b></font>
<p>The Gamecocks were able to pull it off against Tennessee last week, but I still think they don't have enough in the tank. Especially for a team like Arkansas (who's way overrated at #8 in the country, but they should be able to handle this one.
<p>The Call: Arkansas by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Arkansas 44-28</span></b>
<p>Still think the Razorbacks are overrated, and all the talk of them beating LSU and throwing the SEC West into chaos is really just a pipe dream.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Arizona State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76YgFk0II/AAAAAAAABFg/5fHxNqxD9T8/s400/p10-azstate.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76tHWiZdI/AAAAAAAABGY/flIFDH1YuTg/s400/p10-ucla.png
"><b> UCLA (+8.5) </b></font>
<p>The Bruins finally put the pieces together against Cal last week, which they sorely needed to keep their bowl hopes alive. Too bad this week'll be a setback - the Sun Devils are hitting the right mixture of relaxed and hungry for more right now.
<p>The Call: Arizona State by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>UCLA 29-28</span></b>
<p>Wow, the Bruins needed that one bad. I think Neuheisel needed it more though. One more for bowl eligibility, which is very doable, but the Pac12 South is gonna be tough...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Kansas State (+21) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH6H518oI/AAAAAAAABCg/wveskf9W7sA/s400/b12-ksstate.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwSnzCoI/AAAAAAAABCA/4PQjpUklCTc/s400/b12-okstate.png
"><b> Oklahoma State </b></font>
<p>The Wildcat bubble was burst last week, but Oklahoma has a really tough D. Oklahoma State has an opportune D. There's a difference.
<p>The Call: Oklahoma State wins, but Kansas State covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma State 52-45</span></b>
<p>While I think Stanford would match up better with LSU, it seems that the Cowboys are the offensive juggernaut to the Tigers defensive blockade. The Bedlam game is going to be a doozy.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>LSU (+4.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77RgiCkyI/AAAAAAAABHQ/1Br1xC3Dj1M/s400/sec-lsu.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77cHf8ndI/AAAAAAAABII/EYGzICBpVTQ/s400/sec-alabama2.png
"><b> Alabama </b></font>
<p>I gotta admit, I'm not a huge believer in Trent Richardson. Not that he's not a good back, he is. And I understand the best skill player on one of the best teams has to get Heisman votes, but he hasn't blown anyone's socks off yet. This is his opportunity, but I still think we'll see an average effort. The ball bounces the Tigers' way and they squeak it out.
<p>The Call: LSU by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>LSU 9-6</span></b>
<p>Yeah, not the game everyone was hoping for (especially the Tide fans), but that would've been hard to pull off given the over-the-top hype this game received. Sure the D was outstanding, and I think Alabama would still be favored against any other team out there, but they definitely have their weak points.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oregon (-16.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4LYltNLI/AAAAAAAABJo/rZuigm3jx1w/s400/p10-oregon.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76sd2zROI/AAAAAAAABGI/12ctbtIZT0o/s400/p10-wash.png
"><b> Washington </b></font>
<p>There's a whole lotta disgruntled feelings in this one, and for good reason. The Ducks are reeling a bit, and if there's a team that can out-physical them, it's the Huskies.
<p>The Call: Washington by 3
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Oregon 34-17</span></b>
<p>Ah, dammit. I thought it was a good call, but being off by 1/2 point against the spread hurts. Both of these teams have good matchups next week against Stanford and USC, so they can't focus too much on this one.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Another tough week. 9-5 Straight up, 6-8 against the spread. Only a few weeks left to get things straightened out before bowl season...Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-63109496114572413612011-10-28T15:35:00.005-04:002011-10-31T15:32:20.694-04:00Week 9 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>BYU </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw2UxGvieI/AAAAAAAABOY/847r5GCL5b4/s400/mtnwest-byu.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG9pIkyJKI/AAAAAAAABIY/TtuLi3ZHa5s/s400/mtnw-tcu.png
"><b> TCU (-13) </b></font>
<p><i>These two are pretty even in the Mountain West right now, at least more even than a 2TD spread would indicate.</i>
<p>The Call: TCU wins, but BYU covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>TCU 38-28</span></b>
<p>Yup.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Michigan State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spgv5lOpV9I/AAAAAAAABKI/omLt44d-G2k/s400/b10-mist3.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75r4sT-vI/AAAAAAAABEw/Hz_qMipwyHA/s400/b12-nebraska3.png
"><b> Nebraska (-4) </b></font>
<p><i>The Spartans have just been tearing up the Big10 so far this year, but how much of a hangover will they have after last week's miracle win? I think their D will show up again, but Nebraska is going to be more focused and will be a force on D themselves. The over/under on this one is 49 - go with the under.</i>
<p>The Call: Nebraska by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Nebraska 24-3</span></b>
<p>Got it - counting that one as +2.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Missouri </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH5qbl9lI/AAAAAAAABCY/_rozvLRVhtI/s400/b12-mizzou.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHvjqR43I/AAAAAAAABBw/LbjVXIRER5I/s400/b12-txa%26m.png
"><b> Texas A&M (-10) </b></font>
<p><i>Bit of a tricky one here. The Aggies haven't been good at covering this season, especially big spreads. But the Tigers haven't been that great themselves at just 4-3. I think we're gonna have to go with A&M on this one though - the Tigers just haven't fared well on the road.</i>
<p>The Call: Texas A&M by 13
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Missouri 38-31</span></b>
<p>What the hell have the Aggies been doing at halftime?
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Air Force </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw2UR2QoCI/AAAAAAAABOQ/kiYA3v9HqbM/s400/mtnwest-airforce.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw17kfgNJI/AAAAAAAABN4/2mnY_dNpoP4/s400/mtnwest-newmexico.png
"><b> New Mexico (+30.5) </b></font>
<p><i>That's a huge spread, and the Falcons aren't a juggernaut. But the Lobos have been spotted more than 20 points four times this season, and each time they still haven't managed to cover. </i>
<p>The Call: Air Force by 35
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Air Force 42-0</span></b>
<p>Yeah, like that one.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Florida </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77SoBgvPI/AAAAAAAABHo/rBJBLeV_BgY/s400/sec-florida.png
"> v <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Ss5f3sI/AAAAAAAABHg/q_n3VneZ7jM/s400/sec-georgia.png
"><b> Georgia (-3) </b></font>
<p><i>The Dawgs are focused and back on track after a rough start to the season, while the Gators are going through a bit of a rough patch themselves. Florida just doesn't look like the supremely confident/talented team they have in the past, and I think Georgia will be able to capitalize on some mistakes.</i>
<p>The Call: Georgia by 9
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia 24-20</span></b>
<p>Close, but I'll take it.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Baylor (+14) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIF_VNIWI/AAAAAAAABDA/ZIk_xCm0XL0/s400/b12-baylor.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwSnzCoI/AAAAAAAABCA/4PQjpUklCTc/s400/b12-okstate.png
"><b> Oklahoma State </b></font>
<p><i>The Cowboy offense is going to score, we know that much. But how are they going to handle Griffin? He's been slowed down a couple of times this season, but not much and by teams with better D's than the Cowboys. Shootout, sure, but it might be close...</i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma State wins, but Baylor covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma State </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">59-24</span></b>
<p>And this is where things start to go bad...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Illinois (+5.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHY7UL94I/AAAAAAAABBg/GqntPmHFbuc/s400/b10-ill.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGz3TP0rI/AAAAAAAABAg/rdIsqCDcofs/s400/b10-pennst.png
"><b> Penn State </b></font>
<p><i>Sure the Nittany Lions are 7-1, but it's a wholly unremarkable 7-1 and they're just 2-6 against the spread this season. The Illini aren't much better at 3-5 against the spread, and they're trying to break out of a 2-game losing streak rut. I think the Zooker can turn things around.</i>
<p>The Call: Illinois by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Penn State </span><span style="color:#33cc00;">10-7</span></b>
<p>That's not helping.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oklahoma (-13.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74g_4puGI/AAAAAAAABEg/-lDby6D25Zo/s400/b12-oklahoma2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH6H518oI/AAAAAAAABCg/wveskf9W7sA/s400/b12-ksstate.png
"><b> Kansas State </b></font>
<p><i>An undefeated two-touchdown underdog playing at home? That's a recipe for a beatdown right there, but this is the Sooners we're talking about. They always seem to lose one during the regular season but then storm back and win the Big12. The Wildcats haven't really been tested all year, and their D definitely has their work cut out for them, but I don't see it happening. </i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma 58-17</span></b>
<p>I admit, that was an easy one.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Navy (+21.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp1Dv3XADhI/AAAAAAAABRg/rOLmgGyhM3s/s400/indy-navy.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG_X7BdXpI/AAAAAAAABIw/fLN5Up9wsbE/s400/indy-notredame.png
"><b> Notre Dame </b></font>
<p><i>Can the Irish play worse than they did last weekend? Sure - they have. When they don't shoot themselves in the foot they're a formidable team. The Midshipmen on the other hand are having a rough go of it this season - they haven't beaten anyone of note, and aren't playing well in general. But they have won the last two and three of four against the Irish... that's gotta count for something, right?</i>
<p>The Call: Notre Dame wins, but Navy covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Notre Dame </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">56-14</span></b>
<p>I feel for ya, Navy.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oregon State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76Z4T4iQI/AAAAAAAABF4/QLkjahqZ4rw/s400/p10-oregonst.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG9pq6gwWI/AAAAAAAABIg/6uIUKbx4G7g/s400/mtnw-utah.png
"><b> Utah (-5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Utes have had a tough go of it in the Pac12 this season - not the way they wanted to start their affiliation with the conference, I'm sure. But the Beavers are having a rougher go of it at just 2-5 on the season. They need this one bad, and I think they'll be able to conjure up some magic.</i>
<p>The Call: Oregon State by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Utah 27-8</span></b>
<p>Ouch.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>South Carolina </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77H67EheI/AAAAAAAABG4/Rn0dILoC2jc/s400/sec-southcar2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa5JXT24pI/AAAAAAAABJw/BqJmAFyDQFE/s400/sec-tenn.png
"><b> Tennessee (+3.5) </b></font>
<p><i>With Garcia and Lattimore gone, the Gamecocks hold on the SEC East is slipping. They still have a good D, but they're gonna struggle to score. The Vols are coming into this one battle-tested after playing LSU, Georgia, and Alabama the last three weeks. They'll get things done here. </i>
<p>The Call: Tennessee by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>South Carolina 14-3</span></b>
<p>Really Vols?
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Clemson (-3.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGgIBypMI/AAAAAAAABAA/9mi0KXZAGTg/s400/acc-clemson.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGXTPpltI/AAAAAAAAA_o/ugs9Z4mBhqs/s400/acc-gatech.png
"><b> Georgia Tech </b></font>
<p><i>I'm not sure the Tigers are really on the upward slope that much, but I'm pretty certain the Yellow Jackets are falling. This could get ugly.</i>
<p>The Call: Clemson by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Georgia Tech 31-17</span></b>
<p>Really Tigers?
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Stanford </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4K9Hfi3I/AAAAAAAABJg/WKR3A5FrhSk/s400/p10-usc.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76ttmx0tI/AAAAAAAABGg/zqWh7t8KAeU/s400/p10-stanford.png
"><b> USC (+7.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Would it be shocking if the Trojans pulled off the upset here? Not really - we saw last week that they can play when they put all the pieces together. But the chances they'll be able to do it again (and probably would need to play better than they did last week) are slim. The Cardinal are just too solid on both sides of the line this season. </i>
<p>The Call: Stanford by 14
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Stanford 56-48</span></b>
<p>Whew - that stops the slide for a bit.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Wisconsin (-7) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzD9vjMI/AAAAAAAABAQ/N9E07CWpovQ/s400/b10-wisc.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0XK5J2I/AAAAAAAABAo/hdD5wn6vQYA/s400/b10-ohiost.png
"><b> Ohio State </b></font>
<p><i>Look, if the Badgers get a lucky bounce and win last week, this spread is high double-digits. I don't think the Buckeyes will be able to hang in this one - it should be over by halftime. </i>
<p>The Call: Wisconsin by 21
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Ohio State 33-29</span></b>
<p>Really Badgers?
<br>_________________________________
<p>Quite an ugly weekend for the picking... just 8-6 straight up, 6-8 against the spread. Argh.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-90648683781607985292011-10-21T14:49:00.008-04:002011-10-23T10:11:03.186-04:00Week 8 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oklahoma State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwSnzCoI/AAAAAAAABCA/4PQjpUklCTc/s400/b12-okstate.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH5qbl9lI/AAAAAAAABCY/_rozvLRVhtI/s400/b12-mizzou.png
"><b> Missouri (+7.5) </b></font>
<p><i>With such a potent offense, the Cowboys don't need to be great on defense. They're giving up around 4 TD's per game, which Mizzou should be able to take advantage of. The problem is that the Tigers themselves aren't great on D either - and I don't think they'll be able to keep this one close.</i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma State by 14
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma State 45-24</span></b>
<p>Great overall night for the Cowboys - their path to a possibly berth in the title game just got a whole lot easier.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>North Carolina </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGJBYqHCI/AAAAAAAAA_Q/b5-oW8yXuIg/s400/acc-unc.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGgIBypMI/AAAAAAAABAA/9mi0KXZAGTg/s400/acc-clemson.png
"><b> Clemson (-10.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Hmmm... how do I keep from jumping on the Tiger bandwagon here... Well the Tigers are 6-1 against the spread this season, 6-0 against FBS schools, while the Tar Heels are just 3-4, 2-4 against FBS. Game in Death Valley... that's gotta be worth a FG.</i>
<p>The Call: Clemson by 13
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Clemson 59-38</span></b>
<p>The Tigers came crashing out the gate in the second half, effectively putting the game away with 20 minutes to go. The biggest road block they may face in the next few weeks may be heightened expectations and the pressure that comes with a top-5 ranking & trying to preserve an undefeated season.......
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Kansas State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH6H518oI/AAAAAAAABCg/wveskf9W7sA/s400/b12-ksstate.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH6cG4ZiI/AAAAAAAABCo/UYOvGUNTlQs/s400/b12-kansas.png
"><b> Kansas (+10.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Sure the Jayhawks are back to their cellar-dwelling ways, but I'm not entirely sold on the Wildcats. I know they're 6-0, but they haven't really played anyone. They'll get to the meat of their schedule in a week, and I think they'll drop at least 2 of those 3 against Oklahoma, OK State, and Texas A&M, but for now they can still live high. </i>
<p>The Call: Kansas State by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Kansas State 59-21</span></b>
<p>Now comes the tough part...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Illinois </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHY7UL94I/AAAAAAAABBg/GqntPmHFbuc/s400/b10-ill.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzULjUKI/AAAAAAAABAY/9WQ1_x-1s9A/s400/b10-purdue.png
"><b> Purdue (+3.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Did Ohio State provide a blueprint for how to beat the previously unbeaten Illini last week? Probably not, in that I expect the Boilermakers to pass the ball more than three times. Whether or not that's going to help them remains to be seen. Both of these two are about .500 against the spread this season, but I think 3.5 is just too low...</i>
<p>The Call: Illinois by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Purdue 21-14</span></b>
<p>It was a good try at a comeback, but the Boilermakers had just enough to hang on for the W - props to them. The Illini are in a tough spot - they're bowl eligible, and should beat Minnesota to end the season, but they have three ranked teams coming up in their next three games. Gonna be tough to get to 8-4, much less 9-3.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>New Mexico </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw17kfgNJI/AAAAAAAABN4/2mnY_dNpoP4/s400/mtnwest-newmexico.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG9pIkyJKI/AAAAAAAABIY/TtuLi3ZHa5s/s400/mtnw-tcu.png
"><b> TCU (-43.5) </b></font>
<p><i>So back in week week 2 the Lobos didn't cover a 37 point spread against Arkansas. This one's 43 points, and the Horned Frogs are no Arkansas this season.</i>
<p>The Call: TCU wins, but New Mexico covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>TCU </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">69-0</span></b>
<p>Really, Lobos? You just made the Horned Frogs look like LSU's big brother. You had the ball for more than 30 minutes and could only muster 85 total yards? I guess I have to give some of the credit to the TCU D - bringing back the old ways feels good sometimes, doesn't it?
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Auburn </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77bisFcpI/AAAAAAAABH4/3TkuXSvbp2E/s400/sec-auburn2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77RgiCkyI/AAAAAAAABHQ/1Br1xC3Dj1M/s400/sec-lsu.png
"><b> LSU (-20.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Okay, okay - I'll give Auburn some props. I believe. There, I said it. They're much better that we thought and haven't crumbled without Fairley or Newton. You were right.</i>
<p>The Call: LSU by 24
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>LSU 45-10</span></b>
<p>Okay, so that's a bit of a step back. Now the Tigers are 5-3, and with Ole Miss & Samford on the schedule, 7 wins are guaranteed. But the game against Georgia will be a tough one, and the one against Bama... well, don't expect the Tide to take their foot off the gas - that's gonna be ugly. Props to LSU for rolling yet again - I think they've got a solid shot in two weeks to knock off Alabama and plant themselves in the #1 spot for the rest of the season.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Tennessee </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa5JXT24pI/AAAAAAAABJw/BqJmAFyDQFE/s400/sec-tenn.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77cHf8ndI/AAAAAAAABII/EYGzICBpVTQ/s400/sec-alabama2.png
"><b> Alabama (-29.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Listen, at some point the magic contained within Dooley's orange pants has to kick in. It just has to - why else would he wear them all the time?</i>
<p>The Call: Alabama wins, but Tennessee covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Alabama </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">36-9</span></b>
<p>Ah - c'mon, pants! You can't summon enough juice for a single point in the second half? I'm not saying Dooley needs to go with the bland khaki, but maybe black, maybe a dark brown... something else has gotta be better than the orange.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>USC (+9.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4K9Hfi3I/AAAAAAAABJg/WKR3A5FrhSk/s400/p10-usc.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG_X7BdXpI/AAAAAAAABIw/fLN5Up9wsbE/s400/indy-notredame.png
"><b> Notre Dame </b></font>
<p><i>If the Trojans can put a full game on both offense and defense together they have a shot in this one. I don't think that'll happen, but with rivalry games you never know - I wouldn't be surprised if the Irish revert (at least for a quarter or so) back to their early-season shenanigans.</i>
<p>The Call: Notre Dame wins, but USC covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>USC </span><span style="color:#33cc00;">31-17</span></b>
<p>Yup - that's exactly what the Trojans needed to happen. They'll jump into the AP rankings, probably #15-18, but have a dominant Stanford team to tackle next. The Irish just can't seem to get out of their own way at all - the timely penalties, the turnovers... it's just a lack of discipline. They'll get better, probably, but not before finishing this season with 4+ losses.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas Tech </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74hFHhTYI/AAAAAAAABEo/gYy1nEzy3xU/s400/b12-txtech2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74g_4puGI/AAAAAAAABEg/-lDby6D25Zo/s400/b12-oklahoma2.png
"><b> Oklahoma (-28.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Both of these two are 4-2 against the spread this season, and even losing their last two games the Red Raiders have put up over 34 points in every game this season. The Sooners are good, but that spread's just too big.</i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma wins, but Texas Tech covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Texas Tech </span><span style="color:#33cc00;">41-38</span></b>
<p>A bit of a stunner, there. We knew that the Sooners would come storming back in the second half, but that was a gutsy performance by the Red Raiders. They were able to counterpunch that whole second half, which can be hard to do. Well done, boys. The Sooners still might have a chance at the title game, but with other unbeatens out there, they're gonna need a lot of help.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Washington </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76sd2zROI/AAAAAAAABGI/12ctbtIZT0o/s400/p10-wash.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76ttmx0tI/AAAAAAAABGg/zqWh7t8KAeU/s400/p10-stanford.png
"><b> Stanford (-20) </b></font>
<p><i>The Huskies have surprised a lot of people this season, bolting to a 5-1 start against an admittedly weak slate. The Cardinal are where people thought they'd be, but they haven't been tested either - this'll be the toughest matchup so for for either team. Amazingly, these two are a combined 11-1 against the spread and 11-0 against FBS teams in the spread. Something's gotta give - I think Luck will be too much for the Husky D and the Stanford D will be able to contain. </i>
<p>The Call: Stanford by 21
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Stanford 65-21</span></b>
<p>I don't care if their schedule is weak - these Cardinal are dominating anyone they play right now. Now that Oklahoma and Wisconsin are out of the way, they stand a reasonable shot at getting to the title game if they can continue their ways. It'll be trickier against USC, Oregon, and (maybe not so much) Notre Dame, and I think they'll be taken to the wire in at least one of those, but things are looking much better today than they did yesterday for their chances.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Wisconsin (-7.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzD9vjMI/AAAAAAAABAQ/N9E07CWpovQ/s400/b10-wisc.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spgv5lOpV9I/AAAAAAAABKI/omLt44d-G2k/s400/b10-mist3.png
"><b> Michigan State </b></font>
<p><i>I've been bully on the Badgers all season, but the Spartans have been flying under the radar with a stellar D. I'm curious how their tactics against Michigan last week are going to change - extremely physical bordering on dirty at times. If there was a game they needed to play that way again, it's this one. But will the refs been looking to throw more flags against them after the backlash last week? Will the Badgers be able to counter after having time to dissect the game tape? Will the Spartans be as fierce without Gholston? So many questions... I'm not ready to waver on the Badgers just yet...</i>
<p>The Call: Wisconsin by 9
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Michigan State 37-31</span></b>
<p>Wow - that was a hell of a game, and a hell of an ending. Some big questions got answered, but the biggest one now is How did the Spartans lose 31-13 to Notre Dame? Knocking off Ohio State, Michigan, and Wisconsin, the big 3 of the Big10 for decades, all in three weeks is fantastic - one more against newcomer Nebraska is about the only thing standing between them and a conference championship. The Badgers are still a great team, and I'm still on board - 11-1 and a BCS berth is still a good bet.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Not bad this week - 7-4 both straight up and AtS. With the upsets that happened, I'll take it.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-23880340894613941082011-10-14T13:22:00.004-04:002011-10-16T16:42:11.473-04:00Week 7 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Indiana </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHAUxL2oI/AAAAAAAABBY/DScoxJTI2wc/s400/b10-ind.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzD9vjMI/AAAAAAAABAQ/N9E07CWpovQ/s400/b10-wisc.png"><b> Wisconsin (-39.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Of course the Badgers are going to win this one, but I need to make up some ground against the spread. They've covered some big ones so far this season, but this'll be their highest to date. The Hoosiers aren't really getting much done, but they have made some of their matchups closer than expected.</i>
<p>The Call: Wisconsin by 42
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Wisconsin 59-7</span></b>
<p>I don't know that there's much more the Badgers can do to move up in the rankings. They're gonna be stuck unless some of the teams in front of them lose...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Baylor (+8.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIF_VNIWI/AAAAAAAABDA/ZIk_xCm0XL0/s400/b12-baylor.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHvjqR43I/AAAAAAAABBw/LbjVXIRER5I/s400/b12-txa%26m.png"><b> Texas A&M</b></font>
<p><i> This one's a bit of a tossup. The Aggies are trying to survive after getting mauled for the last month, while the Bears are gonna be gunning big time for the team that they feuded with for so many months about the Big12. It should be entertaining if nothing else.</i>
<p>The Call: Baylor by 3
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Texas A&M 55-28</span></b>
<p>I guess this is just another example of the fact that "wanting it" doesn't usually mean jack squat.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Michigan (+2.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG_jotbuI/AAAAAAAABBI/LCyvh0cFVjw/s400/b10-michigan.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spgv5lOpV9I/AAAAAAAABKI/omLt44d-G2k/s400/b10-mist3.png"><b> Michigan State</b></font>
<p><i> The Spartans are playing lights out on defense right now, but besides Notre Dame they've played a bunch of easy ones (yes, Ohio State's offense included). The Wolverine D has been nearly as solid, and their offense will be able to move the ball. </i>
<p>The Call: Michigan by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Michigan State 28-14</span></b>
<p>Hmmm... interesting. Next week's matchup between Michigan State and Wisconsin just got a whole lot more interesting.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Florida State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGYZsLFVI/AAAAAAAAA_w/pzjv0T5GbH4/s400/acc-floridast.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGZFE93uI/AAAAAAAAA_4/f_d5iq5-of4/s400/acc-duke.png"><b> Duke (+12.5)</b></font>
<p><i> This one isn't as cut and dried as might be expected. The Seminoles are reeling, dropping like a rock after starting the season in the top 5. The Blue Devils are much better than usual (and have a better record) at 3-2. But some things never change in the ACC, and I think this week things start to get back to normal. </i>
<p>The Call: Florida State by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Florida State 41-16</span></b>
<p>Yeah, I think the Seminoles will take that one. Tough loss for the Dukies, but going bowling for the first time in years is still a decent possibility.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>LSU (-17) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77RgiCkyI/AAAAAAAABHQ/1Br1xC3Dj1M/s400/sec-lsu.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa5JXT24pI/AAAAAAAABJw/BqJmAFyDQFE/s400/sec-tenn.png"><b> Tennessee</b></font>
<p><i> The Vols are in need of some help this year, on both sides of the ball, while the Tigers are perfectly fine, thank you very much.</i>
<p>The Call: LSU by 27
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>LSU 38-7</span></b>
<p>Is it me or do the Tigers always feel like they're starting all their possessions around the 50? They just dominate the field position game, which gives them some wiggle room all around.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Ohio State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0XK5J2I/AAAAAAAABAo/hdD5wn6vQYA/s400/b10-ohiost.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHY7UL94I/AAAAAAAABBg/GqntPmHFbuc/s400/b10-ill.png"><b> Illinois (-3.5)</b></font>
<p><i> A big one for both these teams, and a bit of a hard pick as well. The Illini are off to a stellar start, while the Buckeyes are just trying to make it through the season without too much damage. Both are 3-3 against the spread this year, with no discernable clues as to when they show up and when they cut it close or even lose. C'mon, gut - what says you?</i>
<p>The Call: Illinois by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Ohio State 17-7</span></b>
<p>So the Buckeyes are this years Georgia, huh? I don't know what I'm gonna do with them. I know what I'm gonna do with the gut though - put in the ear plugs.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oklahoma State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwSnzCoI/AAAAAAAABCA/4PQjpUklCTc/s400/b12-okstate.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwMWCG2I/AAAAAAAABB4/bzfd265F8k0/s400/b12-texas.png"><b> Texas (+7)</b></font>
<p><i> The Longhorns got throttled by Oklahoma last week, but they always seem to have the Cowboys number, at least when it comes to the mental edge. But the Cowboys are rolling along this season and won't let this one get into their heads.</i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma State by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma State 38-26</span></b>
<p>Solid overall effort from the Cowboys, especially from their defense which was on the field for nearly 40 minutes. The Longhorns are still growing, an eve though they're having another down season, by their standards, it's not nearly as painful to watch as last season.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Colorado (+15.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIFojkK-I/AAAAAAAABC4/sjAoZu9xWCU/s400/b12-colorado.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76sd2zROI/AAAAAAAABGI/12ctbtIZT0o/s400/p10-wash.png"><b> Washington</b></font>
<p><i> This one shouldn't be all that close, but that's the most points the Huskies have given all year. The Buffs aren't good at covering though, and I think they'll have a rough go of it in this one.</i>
<p>The Call: Washington by 21
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Washington 52-24</span></b>
<p>Yeah, such a big first half usually bodes well for the rest of the game. The Huskies gotta be thrilled with 5-1 at the midway point, but their toughest matches are in the next three weeks. The Buffaloes are just lost right now - they need to find some way to get a win, any win, but that's looking less and less likely.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Georgia Tech </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGXTPpltI/AAAAAAAAA_o/ugs9Z4mBhqs/s400/acc-gatech.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGHgbycyI/AAAAAAAAA_A/K1fzH2OIcJI/s400/acc-virginia.png"><b> Virginia (+7)</b></font>
<p><i> Really? Just 7? Maybe I'm overestimating the Yellow Jackets, but they could probably cover that each half, if not each quarter against the Cavaliers. </i>
<p>The Call: Georgia Tech by 21
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Virginia 24-21</span></b>
<p>Yeah, chalk that one up to sheer arrogance on my part. Sorry, Jackets - my bad. I won't let it happen again.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Clemson (-8) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGgIBypMI/AAAAAAAABAA/9mi0KXZAGTg/s400/acc-clemson.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGWZEiR0I/AAAAAAAAA_g/fepOLlrHF50/s400/acc-maryland.png"><b> Maryland</b></font>
<p><i> See above.</i>
<p>The Call: Clemson by 24
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Clemson 56-45</span></b>
<p>Huh. Who woulda thunk that the Terrapins could put up that many points. The Tigers' offense is just barreling along right now.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Florida (-2) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77SoBgvPI/AAAAAAAABHo/rBJBLeV_BgY/s400/sec-florida.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77bisFcpI/AAAAAAAABH4/3TkuXSvbp2E/s400/sec-auburn2.png"><b> Auburn</b></font>
<p><i> The Gators have had a rough last two games, losing to Bama and LSU badly. But I'm still not sold on the Tigers and their highwire act - they're gonna fall at some point. No better week to start than this one.</i>
<p>The Call: Florida by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Auburn 17-6</span></b>
<p>Or, maybe I should just start revising my opinion of Auburn. That's probably a good idea. The Gators are going into freefall here, and it's not looking good.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Georgia (-11) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Ss5f3sI/AAAAAAAABHg/q_n3VneZ7jM/s400/sec-georgia.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Hem2liI/AAAAAAAABGo/zmLJA5TT4Us/s400/sec-vandy.png"><b> Vanderbilt</b></font>
<p><i> The way the Dawgs are playing on D right now, I'd favor them against most SEC teams (and might think they could pull the upset over Bama or LSU). The Commodores are the Commodores, not making many waves.</i>
<p>The Call: Georgia by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">33-28</span></b>
<p>Without those turnovers this is a different ending. Georgia's still picking up steam, but they're definitely a bit shakey. It'll be good for them to have a week off before the cocktail party.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Arizona State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76YgFk0II/AAAAAAAABFg/5fHxNqxD9T8/s400/p10-azstate.png"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4LYltNLI/AAAAAAAABJo/rZuigm3jx1w/s400/p10-oregon.png"><b> Oregon (-14.5)</b></font>
<p><i> The Ducks are back to their lightning fast point piling ways, and I don't see the Sun Devils being able to slow them down much - they're gonna need to get some turnovers and keep the penalties at a minimum to have a chance here. I'm not sure they have the offense to keep up even then. </i>
<p>The Call: Oregon by 21
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oregon </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">41-27</span></b>
<p>And the coin falls on the wrong side of the spread at the last second - damn. The Ducks are walking wounded right now, but they've got a month until the big showdown with Stanford.
<br>_________________________________
<p>A little rough this week - just 8-5 straight up, and 6-7 against the spread. Gotta focus more.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-84976065391194694462011-10-07T12:50:00.009-04:002011-10-11T12:34:33.131-04:00Week 6 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Mississippi State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77ItIqXRI/AAAAAAAABHI/U0VYyzQzI44/s400/sec-missst.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spg6YS5ozmI/AAAAAAAABMA/lxgeMwTLvIg/s400/cusa-uab.png
"><b> UAB (+19.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Bulldogs haven't been very good this year, going 0-3 in the SEC. But they have been solid against their non-conf opponents Memphis & Louisiana Tech. The Blazers are 0-4, and while their last two have been close, they've been against Troy & East Carolina. I think this one gets bad.</i>
<p>The Call: Mississippi State by 31
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Mississippi State </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">21-3</span></b>
<p>Ah, close. Not nearly as bad as it could've been, partially because it took the Bulldogs a whole half to get their feet under them. The year-end rivalry game with Ole Miss looks like it's gonna decide whether they go bowling. The Blazers need to get something going this season - it's getting bad fast.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Maryland (+14.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGWZEiR0I/AAAAAAAAA_g/fepOLlrHF50/s400/acc-maryland.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGXTPpltI/AAAAAAAAA_o/ugs9Z4mBhqs/s400/acc-gatech.png
"><b> Georgia Tech </b></font>
<p><i>The Yellow Jackets can put points up on the board in a hurry, and I don't see the Terps D being able to stop them much. If they can keep their own offense chugging, they'll have a shot, but I don't think that's gonna happen. </i>
<p>The Call: Georgia Tech by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia Tech </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">21-16</span></b>
<p>The Terrapins made it a bit interesting there at the end, but the Yellow Jacket offense just wasn't as explosive as expected. They've got two more games to get things smooth again before games against Clemson & Virginia Tech.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Minnesota </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG-3F1WvI/AAAAAAAABA4/xtF4JsK_AD0/s400/b10-minn.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzULjUKI/AAAAAAAABAY/9WQ1_x-1s9A/s400/b10-purdue.png
"><b> Purdue (-14) </b></font>
<p><i>That seems like an awfully big spread for two below-average teams... The Golden Gophers are floundering, but they have the components to move the ball. The Boilermakers haven't covered the spread against any of their FBS opponents this season. </i>
<p>The Call: Purdue wins, but Minnesota covers the spread.
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Purdue </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">45-17</span></b>
<p>Rough first quarter for the Gophers. Too hard to come back from that.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oklahoma </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74g_4puGI/AAAAAAAABEg/-lDby6D25Zo/s400/b12-oklahoma2.png
"> v <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwMWCG2I/AAAAAAAABB4/bzfd265F8k0/s400/b12-texas.png
"><b> Texas (+10.5) </b></font>
<p><i>I can give the Sooners the #3 ranking, but the Longhorns at #11? They're playing better than expected this season, and have worked things out with their two-QB system, but I don't think they're fully recovered yet. </i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma by 14
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma 55-17 </span></b>
<p>Yup. The Sooners are clicking on all cylinders right now, and while the Longhorns have their moments, they're just not at that peak level they're used to. And that's gonna show against the great teams. Should make for an interesting October & November.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Boston College </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGg_5p_JI/AAAAAAAABAI/XaWaAieEwB4/s400/acc-bc.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGgIBypMI/AAAAAAAABAA/9mi0KXZAGTg/s400/acc-clemson.png
"><b> Clemson (-20.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Hmmm... I know spreads don't usually go much higher than a few TD's, especially when it's two BCS teams playing, but there seems to be a lot more space than that between the Tigers and Eagles right now.</i>
<p>The Call: Clemson by 35
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Clemson 36-14</span></b>
<p>The Tigers have started to cut back on the penalties and turnovers, which makes them even scarier. Who woulda thunk that the Halloween weekend showdown with Georgia Tech would be between top 10 teams? Looking like it will...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Kansas (+31) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH6cG4ZiI/AAAAAAAABCo/UYOvGUNTlQs/s400/b12-kansas.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwSnzCoI/AAAAAAAABCA/4PQjpUklCTc/s400/b12-okstate.png
"><b> Oklahoma State </b></font>
<p><i>Sure the Jayhawk D isn't good, and the Cowboy offense can put up points, but the Cowboys haven't beaten anyone by 31 this season and I think their own D is somewhat suspect.</i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma State wins, but Kansas covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma State </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">70-28</span></b>
<p>See, the interesting part with that large spread was seeing what the Cowboys would do in the second half, after jumping to a 56-7 lead. You can bet they were trying out some new things for the next game against Texas.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Arizona (-2) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76YT8deGI/AAAAAAAABFY/4Ri37Sg65vw/s400/p10-arizona.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76Z4T4iQI/AAAAAAAABF4/QLkjahqZ4rw/s400/p10-oregonst.png
"><b> Oregon State </b></font>
<p><i>Remember last week, when I said that the Wildcats were probably better than a lot of .500 teams? They're definitely better than the 0-4 Beavers, who don't look like they're going to escape their annual slow start this season...</i>
<p>The Call: Arizona by 14
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Oregon State 37-27</span></b>
<p>Hmmm... way off the mark on that one. I still think the Wildcats might get to a bowl at 6-6, since their toughest games are behind them - the only other roadblock is the rivalry with Arizona State, and even a loss there wouldn't deep six their chances. Solid showing by the Beavers, who might just be picking up steam.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Air Force (+14) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw2UR2QoCI/AAAAAAAABOQ/kiYA3v9HqbM/s400/mtnwest-airforce.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG_X7BdXpI/AAAAAAAABIw/fLN5Up9wsbE/s400/indy-notredame.png
"><b> Notre Dame </b></font>
<p><i>The Irish have rebounded nicely from their 0-2 start and are playing like the team many thought they could be in August. The Falcons are 3-1, but they really haven't played anyone and haven't been covering spreads.</i>
<p>The Call: Notre Dame by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Notre Dame 59-33</span></b>
<p>There's the Irish everyone was fearing. The season-ender at Stanford should be a doozy, and the main impediment to a 10-win season.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Florida </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77SoBgvPI/AAAAAAAABHo/rBJBLeV_BgY/s400/sec-florida.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77RgiCkyI/AAAAAAAABHQ/1Br1xC3Dj1M/s400/sec-lsu.png
"><b> LSU (-13.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Sure losing Brantley is going to impact the Gators, but it's not like they were lighting up the scoreboard with him - the Gator passing game is ranked 86th right now. I have a feeling the Gator D is going to show up and give the Tigers a bit of their own medicine. Not enough that they'll win, but it'll be closer than two TD's.</i>
<p>The Call: LSU wins, but Florida covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>LSU </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">41-11</span></b>
<p>Not quite. Time to start giving LSU more credit, especially when it comes to their offense. They might not be as balanced as Alabama or Oklahoma, but they'll put points on the board just like anyone. Another tough loss for the Gators, who will need some things to go their way to get back to the SEC championship game.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas A&M (-9.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHvjqR43I/AAAAAAAABBw/LbjVXIRER5I/s400/b12-txa%26m.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74hFHhTYI/AAAAAAAABEo/gYy1nEzy3xU/s400/b12-txtech2.png
"><b> Texas Tech </b></font>
<p><i>The Aggies are feeling it after collapsing in the second halves of the past two games, and that's rough, but it's not gonna happen again and again. The Red Raiders are 4-0, but they've played Tuberville's usual slate of cupcakes. No upset here.</i>
<p>The Call: Texas A&M by 11
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Texas A&M </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">45-40</span></b>
<p>And garbage-time strikes again. Argh. The Aggies are getting ready for the meat of their last Big12 season, and you can bet it's not going to get any easier.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Ohio State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0XK5J2I/AAAAAAAABAo/hdD5wn6vQYA/s400/b10-ohiost.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75r4sT-vI/AAAAAAAABEw/Hz_qMipwyHA/s400/b12-nebraska3.png
"><b> Nebraska (-11.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Huskers got pounded by Wisconsin last week, but I'm not inclined to hold that against them too much. What's more problematic is that they're not covering spreads this season - just 1-4 in that area. The Buckeyes are a mystery - sure they have talent, but two games in their last three they've been held under 10 points. The Huskers know what they did wrong last week, and I think they'll adjust. No such luck for the Bucks. </i>
<p>The Call: Nebraska by 16
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Nebraska </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">34-27</span></b>
<p>Heartbreaker for the Buckeyes - they're just gonna have to go through their rough patch, however long it lasts, and hope to rebound quickly. The Huskers needed that one, and while there'll be some interesting matchups in the rest of their Big10 slate, they should be favored in most if not all of them.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Solid with the straight up, as usual, 10-1, but just as bad against the spread, 3-8. Ouch.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-58719588575890180552011-09-30T08:34:00.005-04:002011-10-02T10:54:06.152-04:00Week 5 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas A&M </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHvjqR43I/AAAAAAAABBw/LbjVXIRER5I/s400/b12-txa%26m.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77b25YQpI/AAAAAAAABIA/2Kfz-VHoIhE/s400/sec-arkansas.png
"><b> Arkansas (+2.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Aggies haven't fared too well against their soon-to-be-brothers in the SEC lately, and last week's tough breakdown against Oklahoma State isn't going to help. Still, the Razorbacks three wins are against cupcakes and their one decent opponent, Alabama last week, plastered them. I think the Aggies can recover and get back on track.</i>
<p>The Call: Texas A&M by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Arkansas 42-38</span></b>
<p>Another week, another collapse by the Aggie D. If it didn't get into their heads last weekend, it sure will after this one. The Razorbacks should have pretty easy go of it the rest of October, with Old Miss & Vandy on the slate, which should allow them to get their own defensive footing again.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Mississippi State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77ItIqXRI/AAAAAAAABHI/U0VYyzQzI44/s400/sec-missst.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Ss5f3sI/AAAAAAAABHg/q_n3VneZ7jM/s400/sec-georgia.png
"><b> Georgia (-7) </b></font>
<p><i>The Dawgs are finally starting to find their footing, while the Bulldogs are having a bit of a rough season.</i>
<p>The Call: Georgia by 9
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia 24-10</span></b>
<p>Next week against Tennessee should be a good test for the Dawgs - we'll know if these last three wins are indicative of them turning around onto the right path or just playing much weaker teams these last three weeks. The Bulldogs have two more easy wins on their slate the rest of the year, so they'll need to find two conference wins in the SEC somewhere to become bowl eligible. I don't see it happening...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Penn State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHAUxL2oI/AAAAAAAABBY/DScoxJTI2wc/s400/b10-ind.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGz3TP0rI/AAAAAAAABAg/rdIsqCDcofs/s400/b10-pennst.png
"><b> Indiana (+15.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Look, I know the Nittany Lions struggled against Alabama two weeks ago, but the Hoosiers struggle every game. This one will get away from them at the beginning. </i>
<p>The Call: Penn State by 24
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Penn State </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">16-10</span></b>
<p>Really? The Nittany Lions don't have Nebraska, Ohio State, and Wisconsin until the last three weeks of the season, but they need to start getting their house in order or those games are gonna be over pretty quickly.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Rutgers </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75-aHDqZI/AAAAAAAABFI/e_CxXIO_kYE/s400/be-rutgers3.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75-gTDHrI/AAAAAAAABFQ/vnn1SDlEets/s400/be-syracuse3.png
"><b> Syracuse (-1.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Orangemen are 3-1, but their wins have been in overtime against not-so-great teams and against a cupcake. Nothing too impressive there. The Scarlet Knights don't have any spectacular performances either, but have played better and more consistently so far this season. </i>
<p>The Call: Rutgers by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Rutgers 19-16</span></b>
<p>Ugly one. The Scarlet Knights couldn't get anything going on the ground the whole day, and both teams turned the ball over so much that the Orangemen will be kicking themselves for a while about this one.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas Tech </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74hFHhTYI/AAAAAAAABEo/gYy1nEzy3xU/s400/b12-txtech2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH6cG4ZiI/AAAAAAAABCo/UYOvGUNTlQs/s400/b12-kansas.png
"><b> Kansas (+6.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Tommy Tuberville's boys are clipping right along so far this season, getting their usual Red Raider sugar high. And I just can't get that Jayhawk demolition at Georgia Tech out of my mind...</i>
<p>The Call: Texas Tech by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Texas Tech 45-34</span></b>
<p>Yup.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Arizona </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76YT8deGI/AAAAAAAABFY/4Ri37Sg65vw/s400/p10-arizona.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4K9Hfi3I/AAAAAAAABJg/WKR3A5FrhSk/s400/p10-usc.png
"><b> USC (-12.5) </b></font>
<p><i>No, the Trojans aren't going to implode again like they did against Arizona State last week, but they'll make some mistakes as always. The Wildcats have played (and lost to) three Top-10 teams in the last three weeks, which has to be messing with their confidence right now...</i>
<p>The Call: USC wins, but Arizona covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>USC 48-41</span></b>
<p>Quite the air show in this one. The Trojans' mistake was that their defense forgot to show up, though the offense showed how lethal it can be when it's clicking. The Wildcats might be the best 1-4 team out there, probably better than a lot of .500 teams.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Georgia Tech </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGXTPpltI/AAAAAAAAA_o/ugs9Z4mBhqs/s400/acc-gatech.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74fr6b3CI/AAAAAAAABEI/aaTNMrZ0HAA/s400/acc-ncstate2.png
"><b> NC State (+10) </b></font>
<p><i>Dare we believe in the Yellow Jackets this season? They seem to be a bit renewed and able to adjust better than they have in the past... The Wolfpack just aren't playing well right now - they haven't covered a spread all season.</i>
<p>The Call: Georgia Tech by 14
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia Tech </span><span style="color:#3333ff;">45-35</span></b>
<p>And the Yellow Jackets continue to roll. I guess equaling the spread is better than not covering it.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Bowling Green </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3zOUBzlI/AAAAAAAABP4/P7XiDBvA5Fg/s400/mac-bowlinggreen.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIZyZvn6I/AAAAAAAABDI/IFD3028VhYI/s400/be-westvirginia.png
"><b> West Virginia (-19.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Raise your hand if you think that the Mountaineers are going to take out their frustrations from last week's loss to LSU on the Falcons. Thought so.</i>
<p>The Call: West Virginia by 31
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>West Virginia 55-10</span></b>
<p>The Mountaineers' toughest games will be at the end of the season, and while it's possible that they slip up to someone in the BigEast before facing Pitt and South Florida, I don't know that I'd bet against them.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Clemson (+7) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGgIBypMI/AAAAAAAABAA/9mi0KXZAGTg/s400/acc-clemson.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGGYc3RWI/AAAAAAAAA-4/d-D-uRZKXYc/s400/acc-vatech.png
"><b> Virginia Tech </b></font>
<p><i>After the Tigers knocked off the Seminoles last week, this became a big game, not only in the ACC race but possibly nationally as well. Clemson's defense is a bit shaky, giving up 20-30 points per game, while the Hokie D is averaging just 10 points per game. That'll be the difference.</i>
<p>The Call: Virginia Tech by 9
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Clemson 23-3</span></b>
<p>Wow. That was rather enlightening. Is this the fabled Tiger team that people have been waiting for for the last decade? Will they finally be able to get to the ACC promised land? Or further? The road from here on out is definitely easier, with a Yellow Jacket collision looking like the only major hurdle until the rivalry game with South Carolina. The trick will be winning all those other games...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas (-9.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwMWCG2I/AAAAAAAABB4/bzfd265F8k0/s400/b12-texas.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH65r4_HI/AAAAAAAABCw/U6BFWdjuXlU/s400/b12-iowast.png
"><b> Iowa State </b></font>
<p><i>I don't usually go for upsets this big, but I'm making the call here. The Cyclones have been able to pull out three close wins, and won't panic if the Longhorns start to score. The Longhorns are still working through the kinks it seems, and might just be ripe for the pickin'.</i>
<p>The Call: Iowa State by 4
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Texas 37-14</span></b>
<p>Eh, had to go for it. I'm still not ready to think that Texas is back, but they're definitely improved from last season - if only in the W category.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>North Texas </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp1BTrmjLsI/AAAAAAAABQg/OUr9mU7OFRU/s400/sunbelt-northtexas.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spg6Y6uPzxI/AAAAAAAABMI/uZN0muETWQk/s400/cusa-tulsa.png
"><b> Tulsa (-23)</b></font>
<p><i>Both of these two are 1-3, playing and losing to some really quality teams. I just don't see 23 points separating them. </i>
<p>The Call: Tulsa wins, but North Texas covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Tulsa 41-24</span></b>
<p>Yeah, that's better.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Alabama </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77cHf8ndI/AAAAAAAABII/EYGzICBpVTQ/s400/sec-alabama2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77SoBgvPI/AAAAAAAABHo/rBJBLeV_BgY/s400/sec-florida.png
"><b> Florida (+3.5)</b></font>
<p><i>The Gators have been better than expected this season, playing at a high level under their new coaches. But they really haven't had to deal with much adversity - this'll be their first big test on the year. The Tide are rolling right now, and after this should steamroll through October...</i>
<p>The Call: Alabama by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Alabama 38-10</span></b>
<p>Aside from the first ten minutes, the Gators were basically inept against the Bama D - and that was before Brantley left injured. The Tide are looking every part the nation's top team, and I'd say they're certainly more reliable than LSU right now.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Nebraska </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75r4sT-vI/AAAAAAAABEw/Hz_qMipwyHA/s400/b12-nebraska3.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzD9vjMI/AAAAAAAABAQ/N9E07CWpovQ/s400/b10-wisc.png
"><b> Wisconsin (-10)</b></font>
<p><i>The Badgers are looking as good as anyone so far this year, but they really haven't played the caliber of opponent that other top teams have. Will that bite them this week? Maybe... the Cornhuskers are playing solid themselves, but also against weak competition. I can see this one going down to the wire.</i>vvvvvv
<p>The Call: Wisconsin wins, but Nebraska covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Wisconsin </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">48-17</span></b>
<p>That was a bludgeoning. Yikes. Test #1 for the Badgers - passed with flying colors. If the race comes down to a few unbeatens or one-loss teams though, do they have the schedule to hang in there?
<br>_________________________________
<p>Again, pretty solid straight up, 10-3, and decent enough against the spread, 7.5-5.5. So far I'm 54-13 (80.6%) straight up this season, quite happy about that, and 36-31 (53.7%) AtS, so-so.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-51809553684787652642011-09-23T09:31:00.005-04:002011-09-26T10:48:32.579-04:00Week 4 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>UCF </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spg6YGiQRUI/AAAAAAAABL4/bYqe6Dh_SUw/s400/cusa-ucf.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw2UxGvieI/AAAAAAAABOY/847r5GCL5b4/s400/mtnwest-byu.png
"><b> BYU (-2) </b></font>
<p><i>This one is quite intriguing. The Knights started off the season solid, with convincing wins, but lost to Florida International last week. The Cougars eeked out a win at Mississippi, but have lost to Texas and Utah in the last two weeks, getting blown out by the latter. I think some regression to the norm is in order here -</i>
<p>The Call: BYU by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>BYU 24-17</span></b>
<p>Not a dominant performance for the Cougars by any means, but it was good enough to get them back on track. Tough one to lose for the Knights, but they'll do well in the CUSA this season.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>San Diego State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw17BV-6GI/AAAAAAAABNw/9Xqax-L7Lms/s400/mtnwest-sandiegost.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG_jotbuI/AAAAAAAABBI/LCyvh0cFVjw/s400/b10-michigan.png
"><b> Michigan (-10.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Two teams who are punching above their current weight right now. Both have rolled to 3-0 starts, the Wolverines against a bit tougher competition because of Notre Dame. And since this one's in the Big House they should have an advantage, but for some reason the gut is saying to go with the Aztecs to win... Maybe I'll play the middle here.</i>
<p>The Call: Michigan wins, but San Diego State covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Michigan </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">28-7</span></b>
<p>Good job not listening to the gut - can't remember the last time he was right... The Wolverines are going to make things interesting in the Big10 this season.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Notre Dame </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG_X7BdXpI/AAAAAAAABIw/fLN5Up9wsbE/s400/indy-notredame.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIbRi0tlI/AAAAAAAABDo/WfRDs6PL7ak/s400/be-pitt.png
"><b> Pittsburgh (+7) </b></font>
<p><i>The Panthers are doing well, losing a close one to Iowa last week, but the Irish are turning things around and getting into form.</i>
<p>The Call: Notre Dame by 14
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Notre Dame </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">15-12</span></b>
<p>The Irish just keep fighting on - they'll be able to out talent some people this year, and they'd better hope they've gotten their game-killing mistakes under control. The Panthers look like they're going to have a rough go of it this season - at least against non-cupcakes.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>SMU (-22.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spg6jH_QMII/AAAAAAAABMg/B7WmvCcRwxc/s400/cusa-smu.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spg6jxfBG9I/AAAAAAAABMw/tZ8wahzwXIs/s400/cusa-memphis.png
"><b> Memphis </b></font>
<p><i>The Mustangs are plodding along, but the Tigers just aren't a good team this season.</i>
<p>The Call: SMU by 24
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>SMU 42-0</span></b>
<p>Yup.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Colorado (+16.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIFojkK-I/AAAAAAAABC4/sjAoZu9xWCU/s400/b12-colorado.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0XK5J2I/AAAAAAAABAo/hdD5wn6vQYA/s400/b10-ohiost.png
"><b> Ohio State </b></font>
<p><i>While the Buckeyes showed a whole bunch of weaknesses last week, the should perform better than they did against Miami. The Buffaloes notched W1 against rival Colorado State, but haven't been very impressive so far this season. That just seems like a big spread for two teams that are floundering a bit...</i>
<p>The Call: Ohio State wins, but Colorado covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Ohio State </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">37-17</span></b>
<p>Not sure if that says more about the Buckeyes or the Buffaloes. The Buffs really need to turn things around, while the Bucks seem to be finding their footing a bit more (though I don't think they'll get to 10 wins in the Big10).
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Florida State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGYZsLFVI/AAAAAAAAA_w/pzjv0T5GbH4/s400/acc-floridast.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGgIBypMI/AAAAAAAABAA/9mi0KXZAGTg/s400/acc-clemson.png
"><b> Clemson (-2.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Seminoles shouldn't have dropped that many places in the rankings after a close loss to a #1 Oklahoma team... The Tigers are good, but not giving-points good.</i>
<p>The Call: Florida State by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Clemson 35-30</span></b>
<p>Okay, now the Seminoles should drop. Great win for the Tigers, who get to play another tough one against Virginia Tech next week. This one will definitely help them in the confidence department though. The Seminoles should be able to rebound in October with a pretty easy slate.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oklahoma State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwSnzCoI/AAAAAAAABCA/4PQjpUklCTc/s400/b12-okstate.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHvjqR43I/AAAAAAAABBw/LbjVXIRER5I/s400/b12-txa%26m.png
"><b> Texas A&M (-4.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Thus begins the Aggies swan song through the Big12. They're gonna get everyone's best shot this year, which doesn't bode well - especially when they're playing a top ten team.</i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma State by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma State 30-29</span></b>
<p>Quite an entertaining game. The Aggies managed to stay in it, despite continually shooting themselves in the feet the whole second half. The Cowboys are chugging along, but can't get caught looking ahead to Texas in two weeks.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Nebraska </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75r4sT-vI/AAAAAAAABEw/Hz_qMipwyHA/s400/b12-nebraska3.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw16gS9wwI/AAAAAAAABNg/v5AsmPskq-E/s400/mtnwest-wyoming.png
"><b> Wyoming (+21) </b></font>
<p><i>The Cowboys are 3-0 on the year thanks to three cupcake wins, while the Cornhuskers are heading towards a great first year in the Big10. That's a big spread, but I think they can handle it.</i>
<p>The Call: Nebraska by 27
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Nebraska 38-14</span></b>
<p>Solid win for the Huskers. Now comes the big boys.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>LSU (-5.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77RgiCkyI/AAAAAAAABHQ/1Br1xC3Dj1M/s400/sec-lsu.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIZyZvn6I/AAAAAAAABDI/IFD3028VhYI/s400/be-westvirginia.png
"><b> West Virginia </b></font>
<p><i>This one should be a doozy - if only for the fans that show up. The Tigers are like a cyclone that just bulldozes through things in its path, with little rhyme or reason needed to propel it forward. The Mountaineers can put points on the board and will need their offense to produce. I don't know that it'll be enough though.</i>
<p>The Call: LSU by 9
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>LSU 47-21</span></b>
<p>How do you gameplan for these Tigers? It's gotta be maddening for opposing coaches... they're solid in most facets of the game, the D is opportunistic, but they're able to just make things happen all over the field. I think they'll slip up at some point, but it's gonna take a perfect game and some luck to get past them. The Mountaineers put up the yards, but just couldn't sustain anything or get into a rhythm most of the game. They'll rebound, but this one stings.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Solid week. 8-1 straight up, 5-4 against the spread. Getting there.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-64385735013055395452011-09-18T20:23:00.000-04:002011-09-18T20:24:18.104-04:00the Positives of Conference Realignment<p>Who would've thought it'd be the ACC's ink on the first official realignment contracts? Give 'em credit though, they were apparently just as active as anyone in trying to position and strengthen themselves. In the middle of all this there's been a lot of negativity flying around: reporters who are upset that the focus isn't on the games, columnists who decry the geographical difficulties, and bloggers who a pissed that their beloved tradition is being pushed around.
<p>But there's a lot of good to be seen in all this realignment, and when the dust settles, I think people will find that they like the new face of the sport alot. Here's why -
<p><b><u>Fewer cupcake games</u></b>
<p>It's increasingly looking like we'll end up with the 16-team superconference setup that's been bandied about. Sure the ACC could stop at 14, as could the Pac12 & SEC, but probably not. And as far as scheduling goes, that's a good thing because most likely teams will play 7 teams in their own division, and 2 teams from the other division of their conference, giving us 9 conference games. Most conferences now only play 8, leaving four non-conference games, most of which are cupcakes against non-FBS or non-BCS teams.
<p>If the teams at the top want to separate themselves from the bottom, that's fine - but in pulling away they're going to have to play more big games against each other. Win for us.
<p><b><u>Baylor (and some of the other left-behinds) will win more often</u></b>
<p>Sure when they're playing in the CUSA or MtnWest (or whatever conglomeration end up being formed) they won't bring in as much money or revenue. But playing lesser competition means that they'll probably be able to win more games. It's just like the lower divisions. Appalachian State is 70-14 in the last six seasons - they win. How much does it matter that they play in a lower division?
<p>If it's a money thing, let's face it - Baylor (and the other left-behinds) weren't bringing in their share of the revenue in the first place. That's why they're being left behind. Once they settle into a more appropriate niche, they'll start to have more on-field success.
<p><b><u>New, exciting matchups</u></b>
<p>Admit it - you're curious to see how Nebraska does in the Big10 this year, or how Texas A&M will fare in the SEC West next season. As the teams and conferences get re-organized, we're going to be seeing a lot more of these situations, with teams finding themselves being pitted against teams they'd never play otherwise.
<p>Will we lose some of the more traditional matchups, like Oklahoma-Nebraska? Maybe. But maybe not. Oklahoma-Texas isn't going anywhere, no matter what happens. If it's that important for teams to keep those rivalries intact, they can schedule them as non-conference opponents (which would help cut down on cupcakes, going back to my first point).
<p><b><u>Better, more accurate rankings</u></b>
<p>One of the by-products of higher-caliber games will be that the voters who rank teams will have more relevant information on teams when filling out their sheets, and they should be able to come up with more of a consensus as to what order teams should be in. Should. Not saying it's gonna happen, but it'll be better than trying to tease out how good an offense really is when they've scored 72 against PoDunk U like we have now.
<p><b><u>There'll be more money for (almost) everyone</u></b>
<p>No, not everyone is going to make out like a bandit here. That's not my point. My point, that I've made before and will continue to make, is that while college football rakes in billions of dollars, the schools and the NCAA are not demonic institutions or greedy businesses - at their core they're institutions of higher learning who's missions are to educate people. Their budgets are being slashed right and left, and the cost of providing quality educations is skyrocketing. If these colleges and universities can make some extra money by playing football, I'm all for it. They need the money, and whether you can admit it or not, the majority of the money eventually goes to education. As it should.
<p><b><u>We're that much closer to a playoff</u></b>
<p>This is the big one, and in some ways the most baffling. A lot of the people crying and moaning all these years about how it's a travesty that college football doesn't have a playoff are the same ones now complaining about conference realignment. A playoff is so much closer to happening with this setup, especially if things go down fast and new conferences start playing next season. That leaves plenty of time before the 2014 re-negotiations about the BCS bowls to get some sort of post-season playoff set up.
<p>It's gonna be real messy, but it's happening. The reasons not to are crumbling, and soon will be overshadowed by the money, and at that point we're going to see a whole new college football postseason. There'll be spots for the champions of the superconferences as well as some at-larges, which will be monopolized by the big boys. All of the schools that get excluded (either officially or unofficially) are gonna be pissed, and there'll be fallout, but it'll happen.
<p><b><u>Less realignment in the future</u></b>
<p>It's like tapping down a container so you can fill it fuller - once this upheaval is over, and things settle, the (major) conferences will be extremely stable. We won't have to deal with all of this uncertainty again for a long time. Sure some people point to the old WAC to show that superconferences won't work, but that's not an apt comparison. The old WAC was made of schools that didn't really fit together, didn't have the relationships to make things work, and didn't have the money keep everything running smoothly. That's not going to be the case with these new superconferences. The money will flow, and the cultures at these schools are much closer than they were in the old WAC. It's gonna be fine.
<p>Ironically, we might even focus less on the whole idea of conferences as a measuring stick for individual team achievements. What conference you were affiliated with and how strong that conference was perceived to be has only been of major importance to the public (and voters) for the past four seasons, ever since Florida slammed the door on #1 Ohio State at the end of the 2006 season. It's the easy route, the assumptions that some teams are better than they are and some are worse than they are based on what others in their conference do, whether they're on the schedule or not. With superconferences, some of those assumptions might go away, and we'll be able to focus more on the individual games and teams.
<p>So hang on, it's gonna be a crazy next few days, weeks, and years - enjoy the ride and try to focus on the good stuff. There's gonna be plenty of it!Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-3546325052206246522011-09-16T10:56:00.005-04:002011-09-18T13:59:39.720-04:00Week 3 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>West Virginia </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIZyZvn6I/AAAAAAAABDI/IFD3028VhYI/s400/be-westvirginia.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGWZEiR0I/AAAAAAAAA_g/fepOLlrHF50/s400/acc-maryland.png
"><b> Maryland (-1) </b></font>
<p><i>The Terps won a good one two weeks ago against Miami, and an extra week to prepare should help them out. But I like the Mountaineers chances here - they should be able to put some points on the board.</i>
<p>The Call: West Virginia by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>West Virginia 37-31</span></b>
<p>The Mountaineers were a bit lucky to hang on there, but they certainly know how to move the ball. Tough loss for the Terps - they'll have to regroup for a couple more easy ones before ACC play.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Penn State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGz3TP0rI/AAAAAAAABAg/rdIsqCDcofs/s400/b10-pennst.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3ALlGvJI/AAAAAAAABOw/d5c096jQfwQ/s400/mac-temple.png
"><b> Temple (+7) </b></font>
<p><i>Listen, I know that the Nittany Lions didn't look good against Alabama last week, but not many people would. And sure the Owls are 2-0, but against really weak competition. And this is still Penn State vs Temple...</i>
<p>The Call: Penn State by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Penn State </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">14-10</span></b>
<p>Well, the Owls are looking better, and it was closer than it should have been. The Nittany Lions needed a big win after last weeks loss to Bama, and they didn't really get the shot in the arm they needed. They have a couple more easy ones to keep getting the kinks worked out though.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Auburn </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77bisFcpI/AAAAAAAABH4/3TkuXSvbp2E/s400/sec-auburn2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGgIBypMI/AAAAAAAABAA/9mi0KXZAGTg/s400/acc-clemson.png
"><b> Clemson (-3.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Somehow the western Tigers have pulled out two wins in the last two weeks, once with their offense, once with their defense. The eastern Tigers had it easy with two cupcakes and little drama. I think this one might come down to mistakes, and Auburn might finally lose its balance.</i>
<p>The Call: Clemson by 6
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Clemson 38-24</span></b>
<p>Yeah, I think that's the game we thought we'd see from Auburn at the beginning of this season. Still a great win for Clemson, who need to keep the momentum going with the Seminoles coming to town next week.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Kansas (+14.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH6cG4ZiI/AAAAAAAABCo/UYOvGUNTlQs/s400/b12-kansas.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGXTPpltI/AAAAAAAAA_o/ugs9Z4mBhqs/s400/acc-gatech.png
"><b> Georgia Tech </b></font>
<p><i>Two teams, two games each, two cupcakes each. Not much to go on, therefore we split the uprights. </i>
<p>The Call: Georgia Tech wins, but Kansas covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia Tech </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">66-24</span></b>
<p>It looks like the Jayhawks are back to their old tricks. That was a lot of yardage for the Yellow Jackets - they're gonna need a breather this week.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Colorado State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw17wnCoTI/AAAAAAAABOA/2E3W0d3uC64/s400/mtnwest-coloradost.png
"> v <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIFojkK-I/AAAAAAAABC4/sjAoZu9xWCU/s400/b12-colorado.png
"><b> Colorado (-7.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Some tough losses for the Buffaloes the last two weeks - I think they can turn things around.</i>
<p>The Call: Colorado by 9
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Colorado 28-14</span></b>
<p>They didn't look as good as they did last week, but it was enough for the Buffs.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Tennessee </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa5JXT24pI/AAAAAAAABJw/BqJmAFyDQFE/s400/sec-tenn.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77SoBgvPI/AAAAAAAABHo/rBJBLeV_BgY/s400/sec-florida.png
"><b> Florida (-9.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Things are actually looking pretty decent for the Vols so far this year. They're putting up points, and the D is looking good. But the Gators are looking better. </i>
<p>The Call: Florida by 13
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Florida 33-23</span></b>
<p>Yup. As long as the Gators can rely on Rainey to prop them up, they'll be fine. Tough loss for the Vols, who were hoping to crack the SEC East this year...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Washington </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76sd2zROI/AAAAAAAABGI/12ctbtIZT0o/s400/p10-wash.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75r4sT-vI/AAAAAAAABEw/Hz_qMipwyHA/s400/b12-nebraska3.png
"><b> Nebraska (-17) </b></font>
<p><i>This time last year the Huskers blew out the Huskies in Seattle, but then got beaten in the Holiday Bowl. I think this one'll be closer, but not by much -</i>
<p>The Call: Nebraska wins, but Washington covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Nebraska 51-38</span></b>
<p>The Big10 is looking like it'll come down to the Huskers & Wisconsin in two weeks, and Nebraska will have a tune-up against Wyoming next Saturday to get the D realigned a bit. Setback for Washington, but they're still in a good position to improve on last year (if only because they probably won't meet the Huskers in another bowl game.)
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Northern Illinois </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3Aztwh9I/AAAAAAAABPA/YB_GZLBH7qg/s400/mac-northernill.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzD9vjMI/AAAAAAAABAQ/N9E07CWpovQ/s400/b10-wisc.png
"><b> Wisconsin (-16.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Same spread for this one? Nuh-uh - this is money in the bank. </i>
<p>The Call: Wisconsin by 31
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Wisconsin 49-7</span></b>
<p>Not much to say here - the Badgers are looking goooooood.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Texas </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwMWCG2I/AAAAAAAABB4/bzfd265F8k0/s400/b12-texas.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76tHWiZdI/AAAAAAAABGY/flIFDH1YuTg/s400/p10-ucla.png
"><b> UCLA (+3.5) </b></font>
<p><i>I shouldn't be calling this one, because things are waaaaay too dicey - no idea what way this one's gonna go. The Longhorns are not looking all that great, barely escaping with a win last week, but neither are the Bruins. I guess I have more faith in the Texas D... </i>
<p>The Call: Texas by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Texas 49-20</span></b>
<p>That lightning wasn't going to strike twice. It might have helped the Longhorns get their feet under them a bit, and next week against Iowa State will be a trickier-than-previously-thought warmup for the Sooners in two weeks. The Bruins just can't get anything going, and it's probably going to cost Neuheisel his job.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Arkansas State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp1BeT1gKpI/AAAAAAAABRI/uYvBeYJjRZk/s400/sunbelt-arkstate.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGGYc3RWI/AAAAAAAAA-4/d-D-uRZKXYc/s400/acc-vatech.png
"><b> Virginia Tech (-24.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Even though the Hokies didn't cover against East Carolina last week, I still think they're going to have a great season. As for why I'm so bully on them though... I'll get back to you on that one.</i>
<p>The Call: Virginia Tech by 28
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Virginia Tech </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">26-7</span></b>
<p>C'mon, Hokies. You're gonna need to do better than that.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Louisville </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIiYaE4RI/AAAAAAAABDw/d1v0WSV708c/s400/be-louiv.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77R-O4zKI/AAAAAAAABHY/5FpckzaLjUw/s400/sec-kentucky.png
"><b> Kentucky (-5.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Neither of these two is looking very good this season, but the Wildcats might be a bit luckier.</i>
<p>The Call: Kentucky by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Louisville 24-17</span></b>
<p>Or not. The Wildcats' ground game is going to need to improve a whole bunch if the want to have any shot of winning a couple in the SEC. The Cardinals needed that one, but it's just going to get rougher from here on out.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Arizona State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76YgFk0II/AAAAAAAABFg/5fHxNqxD9T8/s400/p10-azstate.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHY7UL94I/AAAAAAAABBg/GqntPmHFbuc/s400/b10-ill.png
"><b> Illinois (-2) </b></font>
<p><i>The Sun Devils pulled one out against the Tiger's border-buddy Missouri last week, and they're looking solid in the air. The Illini are great on the ground so far, but they've played two cupcakes. Edge goes to the desert boys.</i>
<p>The Call: Arizona State by 9
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Illinois 17-14</span></b>
<p>Not the prettiest game by any means, but I know the Illini will take it. The Sun Devils really need to regroup and get focused on the Pac12 race, or they're gonna be behind right off the bat.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Ohio State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0XK5J2I/AAAAAAAABAo/hdD5wn6vQYA/s400/b10-ohiost.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGV-eZEgI/AAAAAAAAA_Y/evdGRCM-W2g/s400/acc-miami.png
"><b> Miami (-2.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Another one I'm quite unsure of, but you gotta call the big national games, right? I think the Buckeye's rough game last week was just a hiccup - they should have the experience to grind out a win against the Canes.</i>
<p>The Call: Ohio State by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Miami 24-6</span></b>
<p>Wow the Buckeyes looked bad. That wave they were riding finally crashed, and it wasn't pretty at all. They're going to have to get something going in the air to even had a remote chance in the Big10. The Canes played pretty well, riding a wave of their own right now...
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oklahoma (-3) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So74g_4puGI/AAAAAAAABEg/-lDby6D25Zo/s400/b12-oklahoma2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGYZsLFVI/AAAAAAAAA_w/pzjv0T5GbH4/s400/acc-floridast.png
"><b> Florida State </b></font>
<p><i>The Sooners are built to win this season, while the Seminoles need a few big wins to assert themselves in the national scene again. Our second top-5 matchup in the first three weeks - nice.</i>
<p>The Call: Oklahoma by 6
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Oklahoma 23-13</span></b>
<p>That was one scary hit. Solid job on both sides of the ball by the Sooners, and they're just going to keep rolling. The Seminoles will be okay, and should be able to keep plowing through the ACC, but a few tweaks here and there are necessary.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Utah </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG9pq6gwWI/AAAAAAAABIg/6uIUKbx4G7g/s400/mtnw-utah.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw2UxGvieI/AAAAAAAABOY/847r5GCL5b4/s400/mtnwest-byu.png
"><b> BYU (-3.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Ahhh, just like old times in the Mountain West. Cougar coach Bronco Mendenhall seems like he's a bit phased right now, even though two close games for his team should help them in this one. The Utes are coming off a tough loss in the first Pac12 game, and I think a rebound is in order here.</i>
<p>The Call: Utah by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Utah 54-10</span></b>
<p>That's one way to rebound. The Utes just might surprise some people and take the Pac12 South in their inaugural season, if they can keep playing like that. After a long, tough opening three weeks, the Cougars will finally get a bit of a breather.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Still riding high straight up - 12-3, and improving against the spread, 9-6.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-14708947490257484052011-09-09T08:55:00.006-04:002011-09-11T00:13:33.513-04:00Week 2 Predictions<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Missouri (+8.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH5qbl9lI/AAAAAAAABCY/_rozvLRVhtI/s400/b12-mizzou.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76YgFk0II/AAAAAAAABFg/5fHxNqxD9T8/s400/p10-azstate.png
"><b> Arizona State </b></font>
<p><i>The Tigers are ranked, but the Sun Devils are giving over a touchdown. I've gotta go with the home team here, even though I'm not completely sold on them yet this year. They'll make some waves in the Pac12, but I'll believe they can win it when they actually do. The Tigers have been close to the middle of this Big12 mess, but I don't think that'll affect them.</i>
<p>The Call: Arizona State wins, but Missouri covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Arizona State 37-30</span></b>
<p>Some big plays there, and props to the Tigers for making a game of it (how many games have we seen double-digit 4th quarter leads fall so far this season? Seems like a ton.) The Sun Devils seem to finally be clicking - let's see if they can keep it up.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Iowa (-6.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG_91ul_I/AAAAAAAABBQ/w3zBl-S1Hew/s400/b10-iowa.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH65r4_HI/AAAAAAAABCw/U6BFWdjuXlU/s400/b12-iowast.png
"><b> Iowa State </b></font>
<p><i>Both of these two won cupcake games last week, though the Hawkeyes had a more interesting Saturday, I guess. Gotta just go with the default guess on this one -</i>
<p>The Call: Iowa by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Iowa State 44-41</span></b>
<p>Yeah, I guess the Cyclones get to win one in-state rival game every now and then.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Toledo (+18) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw2_jPT-UI/AAAAAAAABOo/M6PljoVMbqM/s400/mac-toledo.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0XK5J2I/AAAAAAAABAo/hdD5wn6vQYA/s400/b10-ohiost.png
"><b> Ohio State </b></font>
<p>So the Buckeyes rolled over Akron last week - what makes anyone think they can't do the same to the Rockets?
<p>The Call: Ohio State by 31
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Ohio State </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">27-22</span></b>
<p>Hmmm... what to make of this one. The Bucks were sloppy all around, and it definitely cost them. The Rockets took advantage, but just not enough. Quite the scare, and we'll see how it impacts Ohio State going forward.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oregon State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76Z4T4iQI/AAAAAAAABF4/QLkjahqZ4rw/s400/p10-oregonst.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzD9vjMI/AAAAAAAABAQ/N9E07CWpovQ/s400/b10-wisc.png
"><b> Wisconsin (-20.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Yeah, the Beavers lost to a cupcake last week, and they played really badly. But it was more because of the fact that they're playing a bunch of guys who are green and have no experience. It'll help to have one week under their belt, and they'll probably play better this week. But going to the Badgers is no way to work out the kinks. </i>
<p>The Call: Wisconsin by 28
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Wisconsin 35-0</span></b>
<p>I know the Beavers aren't having a good year, but the Badgers are just playing lights out. They're top five, if not top three material right now.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Mississippi State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77ItIqXRI/AAAAAAAABHI/U0VYyzQzI44/s400/sec-missst.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77bisFcpI/AAAAAAAABH4/3TkuXSvbp2E/s400/sec-auburn2.png
"><b> Auburn (+5.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Tigers looked really rusty last week, getting whipped by Utah State most of the day. But playing at home with a psychological advantage against the Bulldogs... I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.</i>
<p>The Call: Auburn by 4
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Auburn 41-34</span></b>
<p>It came down to the wire, and the D still needs a ton of work, giving up 531 yards, but maybe there's a little of last year's magic left in the tank. The Bulldogs might upset somebody in the SEC West this season, but they're not gonna blow anybody out.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>California </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76ZJpBF4I/AAAAAAAABFo/xE48hVBN-co/s400/p10-cal.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIFojkK-I/AAAAAAAABC4/sjAoZu9xWCU/s400/b12-colorado.png
"><b> Colorado (+6.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Buffaloes, as usual, are struggling. And even though this is technically a non-conference game, they're going to get a rude welcome from their new conference-mates.</i>
<p>The Call: California by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>California </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">36-33</span></b>
<p>The first of two close calls for the newest members of the Pac12 today, and the Buffaloes were able to rack up the yards, but the Bears played steady and were able to bend without breaking.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Virginia Tech </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGGYc3RWI/AAAAAAAAA-4/d-D-uRZKXYc/s400/acc-vatech.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spg6smgLadI/AAAAAAAABNI/fgwGARQ9Ocw/s400/cusa-eastcarolina.png
"><b> East Carolina (+17.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Pirates were in it against South Carolina for a long while last week, and they have some skills. But the Hokies are going to roll this season, as usual, and they've won in this series three of the past four games.</i>
<p>The Call: Virginia Tech by 20
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Virginia Tech </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">17-10</span></b>
<p>Not the prettiest of days for the Hokies, and their offensee definitely sputtered a bit, but they got the job done. Another tough loss for the Pirates, who are done with two of their toughest games of the season and will start to rack up with W's.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Alabama (-9.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77cHf8ndI/AAAAAAAABII/EYGzICBpVTQ/s400/sec-alabama2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGz3TP0rI/AAAAAAAABAg/rdIsqCDcofs/s400/b10-pennst.png
"><b> Penn State </b></font>
<p><i>The Tide are still looking like the class of the SEC, and while the Nittany Lions have probably their best opportunity in a while to win the Big10, I don't know that it'll be enough this week. Let's split the uprights here.</i>
<p>The Call: Alabama wins, but Penn State covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Alabama </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">27-11</span></b>
<p>Ah, thought the Nittany Lions would at least put in a couple TD's on their home field. But Bama thought otherwise, and showed why their D is possibly the toughest in the country this year.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Hawaii (+5.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp1EY7Vdd8I/AAAAAAAABSY/9nT0I0WwI2M/s400/wac-hawaii.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76sd2zROI/AAAAAAAABGI/12ctbtIZT0o/s400/p10-wash.png
"><b> Washington </b></font>
<p><i>The Huskies had a rough outing last week, with their D giving up big yards to a cupcake, while the Warriors fended off Colorado pretty handily. But Hawaii isn't great on the road, and Washington should be able to shake off a bad start. </i>
<p>The Call: Washington by 7
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Washington 40-32</span></b>
<p>2-0 for the Huskies, which they haven't done since 2007. They have Nebraska next week, which will be the rubber match to the three-games the two have played in the last calendar year. The Warriors just couldn't get anything going on the ground all game, which isn't the way to play on the mainland.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Stanford </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76ttmx0tI/AAAAAAAABGg/zqWh7t8KAeU/s400/p10-stanford.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGZFE93uI/AAAAAAAAA_4/f_d5iq5-of4/s400/acc-duke.png
"><b> Duke (+20.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The smart bet here is the Cardinal. C'mon now. </i>
<p>The Call: Stanford by 35
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Stanford 44-14</span></b>
<p>Yup.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Cincinnati </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIjKdWABI/AAAAAAAABEA/7iDJEc_fUyE/s400/be-cincinnati.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa5JXT24pI/AAAAAAAABJw/BqJmAFyDQFE/s400/sec-tenn.png
"><b> Tennessee (-4.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Sure the Volunteers are still struggling, and won't fare that well in the SEC this year, but the Bearcats fell off the map last year and don't show any signs of resurrection.</i>
<p>The Call: Tennessee by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Tennessee 45-23</span></b>
<p>Solid all-around performance by the Vols. The Bearcats... meh.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>South Carolina </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77H67EheI/AAAAAAAABG4/Rn0dILoC2jc/s400/sec-southcar2.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Ss5f3sI/AAAAAAAABHg/q_n3VneZ7jM/s400/sec-georgia.png
"><b> Georgia (+3) </b></font>
<p><i>The gut is screaming to go with the Bulldogs on this one. Thinking rationally, the Gamecocks have the better running game, can adjust better, and probably have a psychological edge here. But damn, why does the gut say the Dawgs just need this one more? I hate that. Argh.</i>
<p>The Call: Georgia by 6
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>South Carolina </span><span style="color:#3333ff;">45-42</span></b>
<p>And now my gut knows what it feels like to be a Georgia fan. Without those three miscues by Murray, the Dawgs win this one handily. Credit the Gamecocks for keeping their cool though and getting the job done.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>UNLV (+14.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw161zALWI/AAAAAAAABNo/TqEeIrsZXWo/s400/mtnwest-unlv.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76sJWFUfI/AAAAAAAABGA/2rNOkvUXV7A/s400/p10-washst.png
"><b> Washington State </b></font>
<p><i>What, so the Cougars beat a cupcake and now they're two touchdown favorites? I don't think so.</i>
<p>The Call: UNLV by 4
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Washington State 59-7</span></b>
<p>I have absolutely no explanation for this one (the score, or how completely wrong my call was). None. Am I a Cougar believer? Well... not quite yet. Though I will pay them a bit more attention this season now.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Fresno State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp1EZYjN9zI/AAAAAAAABSg/6TOpDIAw6qo/s400/wac-fresnost.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75r4sT-vI/AAAAAAAABEw/Hz_qMipwyHA/s400/b12-nebraska3.png
"><b> Nebraska (-27.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Hmmm... that's a pretty big spread. I think the Huskers have it in them though. The Bulldogs might be able to keep it close for a half, but I don't think they'll sustain.</i>
<p>The Call: Nebraska by 31
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Nebraska </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">42-29</span></b>
<p>Well, the Bulldogs hung in there longer than I thought. Huskers are looking good - it'll be fun to see them in the Big10 this season.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Georgia Tech </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGXTPpltI/AAAAAAAAA_o/ugs9Z4mBhqs/s400/acc-gatech.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp1BT5sn44I/AAAAAAAABQo/vshT_7TXL98/s400/sunbelt-middletnst.png
"><b> Middle TN State (+11) </b></font>
<p><i>So the Jackets are going on the road to a SunBelt school, huh? Plus the whole "passing" deal... they're all about trying new things this season, I guess.</i>
<p>The Call: Georgia Tech by 14
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Georgia Tech 49-21</span></b>
<p>Good game to work on the passing, but nearly 400 yards on the ground later and the Yellow Jackets are rolling. As much as they can against the competition, I suppose.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>BYU (+7) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw2UxGvieI/AAAAAAAABOY/847r5GCL5b4/s400/mtnwest-byu.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyHwMWCG2I/AAAAAAAABB4/bzfd265F8k0/s400/b12-texas.png
"><b> Texas </b></font>
<p><i>The Cougars toughed out a win on the road last week against Mississippi, but do they have enough in the tank to do it again? The Longhorns had their usual beatdown of Rice, and should be able to get back on track here.</i>
<p>The Call: Texas by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Texas </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">17-16</span></b>
<p>Apparently the Longhorn resurgence is going to take a while. Tough one for the Cougars to lose, but they'll have more chances soon.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Notre Dame </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG_X7BdXpI/AAAAAAAABIw/fLN5Up9wsbE/s400/indy-notredame.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG_jotbuI/AAAAAAAABBI/LCyvh0cFVjw/s400/b10-michigan.png
"><b> Michigan (+3)</b></font>
<p><i>No, the Irish aren't going to implode again like they did last week. But The Wolverines are looking good so far and will be excited for this one. They should be able to start strong and hang on.</i>
<p>The Call: Michigan by 6
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Michigan 35-31</span></b>
<p>What an ending - storybook for the first night game in the Big House. Can their future opponents count on Notre Dame to turn the ball over 4-5 times each game? No - Kelly will get that straightened out. But a ton of damage has been done to this season already. Fantastic victory for the Wolverines, despite some lapses of their own.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Solid again straight up, 14-3, and a bit better against the spread, 8.5-8.5. Not in the money yet though.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-76263087054146871272011-09-04T18:35:00.001-04:002011-09-04T18:35:53.200-04:00Dawn of the Superconferences<p>It's happening. And sooner than many of us thought. But by now, nobody should be really all that surprised. College football conference alignment goes in waves, and there was a big upswing last year when the Big10 and Pac12 added teams. Everyone knew there was more to come, if only because things are in no way settled. After Texas A&M got the balls shaking again, the new wave started.
<p>The news that Oklahoma was reopening their interest in moving from the Big12 was big this opening weekend for two reasons. First because it shortens the Big12's lifespan immensely (they could survive Texas A&M leaving, barely, but not Oklahoma), and second because the Sooners are apparently most interested in going to the Pac12 instead of the SEC with the Aggies. No, that's not a certainty (nothing is until it is, in this business), but Oklahoma president David Boren's words that "We want partners that are outstanding, both athletically and academically" pretty much excludes the SEC, and Big10 Commissioner Jim Delaney's quote that "For us, I don’t think it really changes a lot for us. We’d likely not be reactive" pretty much excludes the Big10.
<p>Texas is being a big cagey about their plans, though it's obvious that the major sticking point between them and the Pac12 last summer, the Longhorn Network, isn't as sticky anymore with the format and setup of the Pac12 networks - it'd be relatively easy to combine the two. Throw in Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, which are both on board with whatever their state brothers do, and you've got yourself the Pac16.
<p>How a 16-team league would function is a bit up in the air still, though we can reference the historical WAC, which had 16 members between 1996-98. Basically, it didn't work, but for reasons that a superconference might not have to deal with. First, some of the schools felt watered down, athletically and academically, so the fit was never there. That wouldn't be the case, at least with the Pac16, since those teams and schools would be a lot more similar than the teams of the old WAC were. Second, a lot of the teams had problems with the travel (i.e. the costs of the travel) - again, it probably wouldn't be an issue with the Pac16 not only because most of the schools would have a partner to travel with but because they have the money to travel. Geography has become less and less of an impediment to conference affiliation, as evidenced by TCU's entrance in the BigEast.
<p>So, at least theoretically, a Pac16 is very doable. But what about the other conferences? As much as Delaney doesn't think this will affect him, it will. In a big way, especially once the SEC expands as well. They're gonna have to play ball and expannd. Ironically though, the Big10 is in the second-best position with regards to expansion, mainly because of their geography. In theory, they could have their pick of a lot of the schools in the BigEast, as well as some of the leftover schools in the Big12 (Kansas and Missouri seem like locks, maybe Kansas St, and Iowa St too.) Throw in Notre Dame and they've got many different options for four extra slots.
<p>Things get a bit trickier for the SEC though. After adding Texas A&M, who do they go to? Sure they could poach a team or two from the ACC, maybe take Clemson or Florida State, but the ACC has been around a long time - a team hasn't left it (ever) in it's 58 year existence. Those teams fit together, play basketball together, and have their ways down pretty good. I'd say a more likely scenario is the ACC trying to get to 16 themselves by picking a few of the BigEast schools. The BigEast's specialty is basketball anyway, and they're already semi-split between football and non-football teams. Teams like West Virginia, and USF aren't going to allow themselves to get left out in the cold here.
<p>That leaves a bunch of Texas schools for the SEC to choose from, along with A&M - Baylor, TCU, SMU, Houston, etc. It might get a little messy because as top dog right now, the SEC is in an attractive position and might be able to lure some schools from their current homes. But it's going to take some wrangling and they'll need to figure out some things sooner rather than later to avoid getting left with the pickens.
<p>Everything settles down a bit and becomes less stressful if there's a spot for non-Superconference teams in whatever postseason (cough*playoff*cough) eventually is formed. If there is, and the non-Superconference members get an at-large spot or two, then it would be possible for a conference like the SEC to stay at 14 or so (though peer pressure might prove otherwise). But the reality is that the top 60+ teams have been looking for a way to distance themselves from the others for <a href="http://thenationalchampionshipissue.blogspot.com/2009/10/how-far-weve-come-or-not.html" target="_blank"><span style="color:#940f04;">almost forty years</span></a>. They've already distanced themselves on the field and in the checkbook - this is the opportunity for them to make the differences official and irreversible.
<p>Sure, some current BCS teams are going to get left out. If there's four 16-team superconferences that's 64 spots, 48 of which are already taken (assuming the ACC expands). That leaves 12, four of which will go to Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, and Oklahoma State. Down to eight, and you have the rest of the Big12 North, the whole BigEast, Baylor, Notre Dame, TCU, and some other burgeoning programs. Not everyone is going to get a seat at the table.
<p>So we'll see how it goes. There's only one certainty that I can see in all these shenanigans - unlike all their actual games, it's not going to end well for Boise State.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-42956327334054205022011-09-01T09:16:00.010-04:002011-09-04T10:16:40.883-04:00Week 1 Predictions<p>Alright, folks. Let's kick this thing off with some predictions. I went 148-66 (69.2%) straight up and 118.5-95.5 (55.4%) against the spread picking last season, which is so-so. Gotta do better.
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>UNLV (+35.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw161zALWI/AAAAAAAABNo/TqEeIrsZXWo/s400/mtnwest-unlv.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGzD9vjMI/AAAAAAAABAQ/N9E07CWpovQ/s400/b10-wisc.png
"><b> Wisconsin </b></font>
<p><i>Tricky one right off the bat. The Badgers are high on everyone's preseason lists, and they should romp in this one (and many others), but they're working with a lot of new parts - getting everyone in sync might take some time. The Runnin' Rebels were pretty bad last year, but they did manage to hang with Wisconsin for a while...</i>
<p>The Call: Wisconsin wins, but UNLV covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Wisconsin 51-17</span></b>
<p>See, garbage-time points can be helpful. Dominant performance by the Badgers until the hit the brakes. Tough night for the Runnin' Rebels - it can only get better though.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Wake Forest </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyGFq5C0SI/AAAAAAAAA-w/OVsId_nKPkM/s400/acc-wakeforest.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So75-gTDHrI/AAAAAAAABFQ/vnn1SDlEets/s400/be-syracuse3.png
"><b> Syracuse (-6) </b></font>
<p><i>The Demon Deacons are looking to rebound a bit in the ACC, where they could make some waves amongst all the turmoil. The Orangemen are coming off a solid 8-5 season and a bowl victory over Kansas State, which should give them a boost here.</i>
<p>The Call: Syracuse by 11
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Syracuse 36-29 (OT)</span></b>
<p>Damn exciting game - well played, boys.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Western Kentucky </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp1BS8NbsVI/AAAAAAAABQQ/46B9jCZAVfc/s400/sunbelt-westernky.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77R-O4zKI/AAAAAAAABHY/5FpckzaLjUw/s400/sec-kentucky.png
"><b> Kentucky (-17.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Wildcats should be their usual ho-hum selves this year, winning easy non-conference games but falling short in the SEC. The Hilltoppers, with just 4 wins over the last three seasons, need a shot in the arm, somehow. But they're not going to get it.</i>
<p>The Call: Kentucky by 24
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Kentucky </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">14-3</span></b>
<p>Really, Wildcats? Really? It's gonna be a loooooong year for these two.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>TCU (-4.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG9pIkyJKI/AAAAAAAABIY/TtuLi3ZHa5s/s400/mtnw-tcu.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIF_VNIWI/AAAAAAAABDA/ZIk_xCm0XL0/s400/b12-baylor.png
"><b> Baylor </b></font>
<p><i>The last few seasons, people have been pretty high on the Bears going into the season, mainly because of Griffin. But they've never lived up to those expectations, and I don't see this year being any different, especially in the uber-volatile Big12. The Horned Frogs are still the Horned Frogs - having them give less than a TD is rather an insult, if you ask me...</i>
<p>The Call: TCU by 17
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Baylor 50-48</span></b>
<p>Thus ends one of the dominant defenses of the last few seasons. Yeah yeah, I know - Griffin is good. I'm still curious how he'll do in the rest of the Big12 this year, but it was a solid game. But the Horned Frogs D isn't going to scare anyone anymore - they'd better keep scoring points in high numbers.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Miami OH (+20.5) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3Ksx1VAI/AAAAAAAABPI/Y-vh1C-8Lf0/s400/mac-miami.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyH5qbl9lI/AAAAAAAABCY/_rozvLRVhtI/s400/b12-mizzou.png
"><b> Missouri </b></font>
<p><i>The Tigers are the ranked team coming into this, and their D should be solid again this year, but breaking in a new QB might be a little tough. The Redhawks were a good 10-4 last year, but they're breaking in a new coach. On the fence with this one... </i>
<p>The Call: Missouri wins, but Miami covers the spread
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Missouri 17-6</span></b>
<p>Nice. Quite happy with that call.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Akron (+34) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw3znO0g-I/AAAAAAAABQI/0D8iNMEx9m8/s400/mac-akron.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG0XK5J2I/AAAAAAAABAo/hdD5wn6vQYA/s400/b10-ohiost.png
"><b> Ohio State </b></font>
<p><i>Few teams have faced more off-season controversy than the Buckeyes, and they've lost a big chunk of their starters from last season. Throw in a new head coach and we're likely to see a big push on the ground from the offense. The Zips were just bad last year, and I don't see them improving much this season. Even a vanilla, mediocre effort from Ohio State's talent should do it. </i>
<p>The Call: Ohio State by 38
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Ohio State 42-0</span></b>
<p>The Buckeye D might get a chance to breathe a bit this year, apparently.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>UCLA (+3) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So76tHWiZdI/AAAAAAAABGY/flIFDH1YuTg/s400/p10-ucla.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spg6sSzknoI/AAAAAAAABNA/YJJq88IG77c/s400/cusa-houston.png
"><b> Houston </b></font>
<p><i>Everyone knows this is basically the last chance for Neuheisel with the Bruins, and they need to come out of the gate strong this season to keep the wheels from falling off. The Cougars weren't good either last year, but they should be much better this year with Keenum back at QB. Does UCLA have any of that magic left that smashed Texas in Austin last season? I have my doubts.</i>
<p>The Call: Houston by 10
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>Houston 38-34</span></b>
<p>Though you gotta admit, there's been a certain cursedness to Neuheisel's tenure, especially when it comes to QB injuries. You just gotta shake your head at that. Keenum is well on his way to and through the record books, though the Cougars as a whole might find the going a bit difficult this season.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Minnesota </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyG-3F1WvI/AAAAAAAABA4/xtF4JsK_AD0/s400/b10-minn.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4K9Hfi3I/AAAAAAAABJg/WKR3A5FrhSk/s400/p10-usc.png
"><b>USC (-23) </b></font>
<p><i>The Trojans are returning a bunch of skill players and should be able to run & gun with teams this season, but the D is still suspect - I'll believe they can hold their own when I see it. The Golden Gophers are coming in after some down seasons - will their new coach be gutsy enough to get a little bold in the Coliseum?</i>
<p>The Call: USC by 28
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>USC </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">19-17</span></b>
<p>Quite the tale of two halves there. Will the Trojans ever cover? Minnesota has some hope this year, and should be able to improve on last years three wins, by the look of things.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>South Florida </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SoyIar3TEOI/AAAAAAAABDY/DfuNFfwYEr0/s400/be-usf.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG_X7BdXpI/AAAAAAAABIw/fLN5Up9wsbE/s400/indy-notredame.png
"><b> Notre Dame (-10) </b></font>
<p><i>The Irish are going to be better this year than their 8-5 last year, and a 10-win / BCS bowl are almost expected. The Bulls might be better than their 8-5 last year, but Kelly should have them pegged from his BigEast days.</i>
<p>The Call: Notre Dame by 14
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>South Florida 23-20</span></b>
<p>Talk about not finishing - on multiple fronts. I can't remember a time when a team was that inept in the red zone... the Irish are gonna have to go back to the drawing board with this season. Nice job staying focused by the Bulls - they're gonna be tough in the BigEast.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>BYU (-3) </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spw2UxGvieI/AAAAAAAABOY/847r5GCL5b4/s400/mtnwest-byu.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77IdzGNlI/AAAAAAAABHA/-ZKTjeykIF4/s400/sec-olemiss.png
"><b> Mississippi </b></font>
<p><i>The Cougars are going on the road in the SEC, but their newfound independence might give them a refreshing boost. The Rebels (and their new mascot) usually do well in non-conference games, but they usually don't play teams like BYU.</i>
<p>The Call: BYU by 9
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>BYU </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">14-13</span></b>
<p>Give the Cougars credit for hanging in there, after doing well but not putting up any points and especially after that pick six. The Rebels are in for a long season.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>East Carolina </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spg6smgLadI/AAAAAAAABNI/fgwGARQ9Ocw/s400/cusa-eastcarolina.png
"> @ <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77H67EheI/AAAAAAAABG4/Rn0dILoC2jc/s400/sec-southcar2.png
"><b> South Carolina (-20.5) </b></font>
<p><i>The Gamecocks are still the favorites in the SEC East, and the should be able to put up better numbers than last season. The Pirates D isn't going to be able to withstand the drubbing they'll get.</i>
<p>The Call: South Carolina by 28
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>South Carolina </span><span style="color:#ff0000;">56-37</span></b>
<p>And garbage-time can taketh away too... damn. I was wondering how long it was going to be before we saw Garcia, and apparently three fumbles in the first quarter is the tipping point. But credit the old ball coach for adjusting and making the necessary changes to get things back on track. That one'll go a long way to keeping confidence up over the course of games this season.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Boise State </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/SpG9pyhjU6I/AAAAAAAABIo/eUzVjtUXpto/s400/wac-boisest.png
"> v <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77Ss5f3sI/AAAAAAAABHg/q_n3VneZ7jM/s400/sec-georgia.png
"><b> Georgia (+3.5) </b></font>
<p><i>Should be a great game, this one. The Dawgs have underperformed the past couple of seasons, but they've got a lot of starters back and seem to have more of an identity going into this season. The Broncos are finally getting some credit for their stellar seasons year after year, holding down the #5 spot in the rakings, and they're a veteran team who knows how to win. Toughest call of the week.</i>
<p>The Call: Georgia by 6
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#ff0000;"><b>Boise State 35-21</span></b>
<p>Not a surprising result at all. It took a while for these two to feel each other out in the first quarter, but after that it was the Broncos who got into their own rhythm and dictated how the game was going to go. Another undefeated season is on the horizon. The Dawgs suffered a lot from injuries, which is a shame because it impacted not only their opening game but will certainly put them at a disadvantage here on out, especially with South Carolina coming to town next week.
<br>_________________________________
<p align="center"><font size=+1 align=middle><b>Oregon </b><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Spa4LYltNLI/AAAAAAAABJo/rZuigm3jx1w/s400/p10-oregon.png
"> v <img align="absmiddle" alt="" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/Sp16-n65gGI/AAAAAAAABSo/qiGADGIWQ0Q/s400/4blank.png"><img alt="" align="absmiddle" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_LzW-_1hKHMU/So77RgiCkyI/AAAAAAAABHQ/1Br1xC3Dj1M/s400/sec-lsu.png
"><b> LSU </b></font>
<p><i>Why they have this game on at the same time as the Georgia-Boise State one is baffling. Both of these teams are missing key components, the Tigers on offense and the Ducks on defense, but I don't know that that'll have much of an impact on the overall game. The big matchup is going to be the Duck offense against the Tiger D - I think LSU will manage to stifle Oregon and maybe even score some points.</i>
<p>The Call: LSU by 4
<p>The Result: <span style="color:#33cc00;"><b>LSU 40-27</span></b>
<p>See, that's the thing about the Duck game - it's gotta be working perfectly in sync for everything to go right. One little hitch and the wheels come flying off, whether it's a turnover, injury... the Tigers did a great job capitalizing on the mistakes and staying on target all night.
<br>_________________________________
<p>Not the greatest start to the season. 10-3 straight up is fine, but 6-7 against the spread isn't going to cut it. Time to buckle down.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-58172191069898587942011-08-25T13:51:00.006-04:002011-08-25T15:40:06.093-04:00Cuban's Pre-Bowl Playoff Idea<p>Andy Staples' column breaking down why Dallas Mavericks owner and billionaire <a href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/andy_staples/08/24/mark-cuban-proposal/index.html?eref=writers" target="blank"><span style="color:#000096;">Mark Cuban's college football proposal</span></a> is an interesting read. In a nutshell, "Cuban wants to stage two games... [to] match the top four teams in the BCS standings from among the independents and conferences without championship games," with the end goal being that "...a team with an uncertain shot at the BCS title game might agree to a game against a quality opponent to strengthen its résumé." Staples then goes on to list more of the details and why the plan is both a good idea and realistic.
<p>But the problem (like so many other playoff ideas) is that it's not realistic and won't go anywhere.
<p>The concept itself is intriguing, but right off the bat there's a major catch-22. Basically, those teams who would be inclined to participate in an extra game to better their BCS title game chances don't really have a chance at getting to the BCS title game anyway. One extra game isn't going to help them because playing one less game isn't their problem. Their problem is that they don't play in a BCS conference, and whether that's fair or not, it's a bias that the coaches and Harris poll voters have. Even a game against another ranked team probably won't help them. If TCU, sitting at #3 last year in the BCS standings, had played and beaten #5 Wisconsin (as they did in the Rose Bowl) before the BCS standings came out, would they have jumped over Oregon for the #2 spot? It'd take a miracle - in the post-bowl Coaches Poll, 13-0 TCU edged a 12-1 Oregon (who lost to Auburn) by just 3 points for #2, 1,336 to 1,333. There's no way they jump an undefeated, 12-0 Oregon for the title game. That's about as perfect of a scenario for this extra games idea as there could be, and the plan fails.
<p>But another part of the plan is that a team would have the option to opt-out of the game, taking their chances that somehow the dominoes will fall in their favor. Staples even admits that, "Last year, TCU almost certainly would have opted out after locking down a BCS at-large berth." Basically, the risk of losing the game (and a potential BCS bowl spot) is too much to go for the gold. If that's a case for a team in TCU's position, who came as close as any non-AQ team has ever come to the title game, then how is it a possibility or a good option for any other team? It's not. Staples continues, "In some cases, a non-AQ school such as Boise State or Nevada could be playing to bolster its case for a BCS at-large berth. In some cases, an AQ-conference runner-up might try to do the same thing." So bringing the other BCS games into it we get into boosting a team's chances at an at-large bid, which is basically just as much of a risk. That's mainly because at-large bids are based on which teams are going to bring the most fans and make the most money for the bowl, not W-L records. Winning an extra game isn't going to sell any extra tickets, so any boost in the rankings just isn't worth the risk of losing. In fact it's probably more of a risk than trying to get into the title game because at least those bids go to the #1 & #2 teams in the rankings, while at-large BCS bids are much more subjective.
<p>The other point is that with the new conference realignment taking place this year, the top two conferences who might have benefitted from such a setup in the past, the Pac10 and Big10, are getting ready to hold their first conference championship games, along with the SEC, ACC, CUSA, and MAC. So basically this idea would only apply to the independents (of which Notre Dame is already a BCS team and already had special consideration), the BigEast (which has already had an undefeated team in Cincinnati passed over for a title spot in 2009), the Big12 (Texas, Oklahoma, and the Big12 powerhouse schools won't suffer in the polls for not having a championship game to play in), and the MtnWest, WAC, & SunBelt (which have no chance at the title game ever).
<p>So the teams with the best shots at the title game don't need an extra game to prove themselves, and the risk is too great for teams that it might help a slight bit. Add to that the fact that the BCS presidents and commissioners would never vote for something that, even just in theory, gives more opportunity for a non-BCS team to appear in the title game (thus diminising their own chances) and all you're left with is another unworkable playoff idea.
<p>***On a side note, I do however like the fact that Mark Cuban is interested in the problem, since he's known for both unique but realistic ideas (current one here discluded). His voice is a great one to have in the discussion.
Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-4158190143554285912011-08-22T12:48:00.000-04:002011-08-22T12:49:21.477-04:00the NCAA Needs a-Changin'<p>Just when you thought the conference realignment wheel that was spinning furiously last summer had slowed down for a bit... bam, Texas A&M speeds things back up. Just when you thought the violations at USC, UNC, and Ohio State were showing the limits of how schools bend the rules... bam, Miami pushes the boundaries ten times further. And just when you thought the NCAA was starting to turn itself around and become more responsive and forward-thinking... bam, the necessity of it's existence is thrown into question.
<p>It's somewhat telling that arguably the biggest scandal in collegiate sports history consists of hundreds (perhaps thousands) of instances of rules being flagrantly obliterated yet very few laws being broken. I don't make the comparison to condone the prostitution or the underage drinking, but I highly doubt that any of the parties involved are going to see any legal punishments for those transgressions anytime in the future. (Hell, they’re not even getting any points in <a href="http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/2011/8/18/2370811/fulmer-cupdate-the-two-minute-warning-has-sounded" target="blank"><span style="color:#000096;">the Fulmer Cup</span></a>.) And yet the death penalty is a realistic possibility for the Miami football program. The whole situation, more than any other I can remember, shows the miles of gray area between the NCAA's rules and state/federal laws.
<p>Aside from the ponzi scheme, legally did Nevin Shapiro do anything wrong? Did the players who took his money or took him up on offers of extra benefits? Did the school administrators who turned a blind eye? I haven't heard of any instances of law enforcement officials becoming involved in the case - their response seems to be a collective "meh". So according to them, in the scheme of right vs wrong, this whole situation is a blip on the radar. But when it comes to NCAA right vs wrong, this is about as far from right as a program can get. And that's a major problem for the NCAA. It always has been, and in some regards it always will be.
<p>On one hand, I understand some of the NCAA's rules, such as the ones regarding academics. If an athlete isn't taking classes and is on campus just to wear the colors and compete, that somewhat defeats the purpose of having teams associated with schools. If the athletes are just mercenaries, why even partner athletics with the school at all? The recent beefing up of APR rate regulations is a good move, designed to put some focus back on the academic part of the partnership between the school and its athletics. So I get that they need to be student-athletes and the reasons for the rules there, as much as some programs might push the boundaries.
<p>As for other amateurism rules, all the extra benefits regulations - what are they in place for? Seriously, it needs to be discussed at a deep, theoretical level and a big-picture viewpoint needs to be taken here. If it really is that important to the NCAA that student-athletes conform to amateurism rules, and they're going to take a stand on that and continue to make it a bedrock of collegiate athletics, then they need to understand the compromises they're going to have to take in return (namely the fact that rule-breaking is still going to be the norm).
<p>Theoretically, I can understand some of the reasons behind trying to maintain student-athlete's amateur status. You don't want schools to get into bidding wars for star players during the recruiting process. But here's the thing - schools have tried to one-up each other for decades, whether it's promoting their facilities, gameday experience, draft or future playing possibilities, campus, lifestyle, etc. The smaller schools who would be at a major disadvantage if schools were allowed to pay players a salary are already at a major disadvantage because of all the intangibles that student-athletes, especially football players, receive. Sure, there might be a difference between amenities and flat out cash, but it's another one of those gray areas. And when you're talking about amenities, there's no way to level that playing field - ever. The schools with the bigger fan bases, deeper pockets, and nicer digs are always going to have an advantage.
<p>So if the aim is to level the playing field in college athletics, that's a goal that's already unreachable. It's just the difference between the haves and the have nots. Is there anything the NCAA can do about this huge gap? Not really. It's pretty much stuck. There are some regulations regarding how a team gets to classify itself as division I-A as opposed to I-AA, based on attendance, teams fielded, scholarships, etc. So, in theory, they could create a new, official divide between the haves and the have nots. But that would get extremely messy, the non-BCS schools would revolt, nobody involved wants the NCAA to have an even heavier hand, etc. It's just not realistic.
<p>On a related note, some people have theorized that some of the BCS schools might eventually break away from the NCAA and form their own body as a way to dissolve this tenuous situation, and while it's possible I don't think it's likely. Like the Rose Bowl and the Big Ten, the NCAA has been around for over a century and has weathered huge storms and changes in the collegiate athletics landscape. That's mainly due to the simple fact of what the NCAA is – it’s an organization of individual schools. It’s not as if the NCAA is some outside organization trying to impose regulations that the schools don’t want – the schools themselves ARE the NCAA. The president is a former university president and chancellor, the committee members are administrators from schools around the country, etc. All of those folks are much more likely to make big, sweeping changes to the NCAA than allow their school to break off from it completely. The only way a split will ever happen is if a majority of division I-A schools decide to do it all together at the same time, forming a new, different regulatory body at the same time. And that won’t happen until the conference realignments settle down – even though the conferences themselves have next to nothing to do with the NCAA, the issue of stability is a big one. The only conferences that are stable enough right now to lead their teams to believe separation from the NCAA is even feasible are the Big10, Pac12 and SEC. The others are still in flux, and we’re probably going to go through another major round of departures and acquisitions, maybe even getting to the proverbial 16-team superconferences, before leaving the NCAA becomes a possibility.
<p>But getting back on track here, I think the big takeaway with this whole situation for everyone involved is that fixing the issues and problems that arise from the system currently in place is no longer good enough - the NCAA as a whole needs to be thoroughly examined, assessed, and changed. Part of this has to be a huge expansion of the number of employees. Sure there’s a lot of committee members from all over the country who have other full-time jobs at colleges and university – legislating and designing rules are fine for them, and in fact they probably should be the ones deciding how things should be run.
<p>But as for the enforcement officers, it’s a well-known fact that there’s only 23 investigators on the NCAA staff. Minimum, they need one for each Division I-A FBS school, not necessarily focused on a single school or based at a certain campus, but simply so that there are enough enforcement officials to handle the workload. We all know that for every Miami, Ohio State or USC that gets caught, there are dozens more that don’t, and the visibility of collegiate programs combined with the media’s ability to report on possible infractions had significantly easier in the last decade to spot and police possible violations. Where should the NCAA get the money to pay for all these new enforcement staff members? Deduct it from the payouts to each school during the year. (If you look at it from two different angles, there’s no way Alabama is going to support reducing it’s take a bit to beef up enforcement on its own program. But to beef up enforcement on Auburn’s program? I’m sure they’d gladly pay then.)
<p>Other than that, I don’t know that there’s a definitive answer for what the NCAA should become or how it needs to change. That’s going to be up to the presidents, commissioners, and members of the individual schools. But they have a lot of gray space to work with, and major changes are going to be necessary if only to start to mend their dismal reputation.
Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-59701124247779969402011-08-14T19:50:00.000-04:002011-08-14T19:51:06.372-04:00Conferences: dilution?<style TYPE="text/css">
.bluetext { color:#000096;
}
.redtext { color:#960000;
}
.whitetext { color:#FFFFFF;
}
.blacktext { color:#000000;
}
.gray { background-color:#AAAAAA;
}
.red4 { background-color:#D20000;
}
.red3 { background-color:#DA5252;
}
.red2 { background-color:#EE8282;
}
.red1 { background-color:#F5C3C3;
}
.red15 { background-color:#D5C3C3;
}
.red0 { background-color:#FBEBEB;
}
.blue0 { background-color:#E3F2F9;
}
.blue1 { background-color:#C4E0EE;
}
.blue2 { background-color:#9EC6E2;
}
.blue3 { background-color:#479ACD;
}
.blue4 { background-color:#2B5E8D;
}
.backgroundtest { background-color: #FFD861;
}
</style>
<p>One of the things that pundits and others say regarding all of the different conference expansion that's continually being talked about is that conferences don't want to take on teams that will dilute their makeup. But this is a bit of a misnomer that needs to be taken apart a bit.
<p>On one hand, if you're referring to dilution in a monetary sense, this is extremely true. Sure there are other considerations, but if a school isn't in a decent market and/or able to at least pull their share in contributing revenue, they stand little chance of being courted by another conference. Financially, this makes sense for all the "current" conference members.
<p>On the other hand, you could be referring to dilution of the competitive aspects of the conference, bringing in a team that simply can't compete at the level the conference is already at. A variation of this is when a school is disqualified for lack of academic credentials. But on the whole, I think this type of dilution, gets more focus than it deserves, partly because there's usually a solid connection between how competitive a team is and how much money they bring in.
<p><b>Would it really be that bad to bring in a new conference member that wasn't able to compete as well on the field as long as they were able to pull their share in bringing in money?</b> (Sure there's the tangled web of how much a dilution in competition will affect the ability of the conference as a whole to make money, and we can't discount it, but at the same time 1) I don't think it's that big of an effect, and 2) I don't think the presidents really get down to that much minutae.) But in general, doesn't it seem like a win-win? Adding a school that gives you more money and more wins doesn't seem like that bad of a deal to me. Which is why the SEC should really be interested in Texas A&M, from a football standpoint.
<p>The table below lists each school's revenue and winning % from a six-year span, as well as their respective ranks in each category. Aside from the teams already in the SEC, Big10, and Pac12, (who I'd peg as the most stable conferences right now in that none of their teams would ever consider leaving) the Aggies have the 4th biggest desirable difference between their revenue rank and their winning % rank. Ahead of them are Duke, North Carolina, and Syracuse, all basketball schools comfortable in their basketball-centered conferences. And realistically, the big conferences aren't going to want teams that are complete creampuffs on the gridiron. (There's no way that Vanderbilt gets invited to the SEC nowadays, but you know that the SEC head coaches are glad they're in the conference and most likely an easy W on the schedule.) The Aggies always seem to have solid players but never can quite get over the hump in the Big12 - while they have potential, there's little to suggest that would change in the SEC. Throw in the Big12's impending demise and you've got a really good situation for both the SEC and Texas A&M.
<p>Of course there are a lot more considerations that go into a teams invitation to a new conference, such as geography (becoming less and less of an issue), academics, overall fit, etc. But money is still the big driving force. And when all the chaos ensues again, the teams that can generate it are the ones who are going to be the prized properties.
<p><table class="no-arrow" align="center">
<tbody>
<th colspan=16 class="font125 white">Revenue & Competition, 2003-2008
<tr>
<th class="sortable">Conf
<th col width=150 class="sortable">Team
<th col width=100 class="sortable">03-08 Revenue (in millions)
<th class="sortable">Revenue Rank
<th class="sortable">03-08 Winning%
<th class="sortable">W% Rank
<th class="sortable">Difference in Rank
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>Duke
<td>318.1
<td>32
<td>.171
<td>116
<td>-84
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Pac10
<td>Washington
<td>319.1
<td>31
<td>.254
<td>110
<td>-79
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Pac10
<td>Stanford
<td>354.9
<td>23
<td>.333
<td>99
<td>-76
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Illinois
<td>309.6
<td>33
<td>.310
<td>104
<td>-71
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>North Carolina
<td>336.7
<td>26
<td>.389
<td>90
<td>-64
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">BigEast
<td>Syracuse
<td>271.3
<td>47
<td>.310
<td>104
<td>-57
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>Kentucky
<td>366.2
<td>21
<td>.438
<td>77
<td>-56
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Indiana
<td>274.4
<td>46
<td>.338
<td>97
<td>-51
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Texas A&M
<td>400.9
<td>17
<td>.493
<td>67
<td>-50
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Michigan St
<td>402.4
<td>16
<td>.514
<td>62
<td>-46
<tr>
<td>Indy
<td>Notre Dame
<td>438.9
<td>10
<td>.541
<td>55
<td>-45
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Baylor
<td>228.7
<td>57
<td>.314
<td>102
<td>-45
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>SMU
<td>179.9
<td>67
<td>.229
<td>112
<td>-45
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Minnesota
<td>357.6
<td>22
<td>.507
<td>64
<td>-42
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Pac10
<td>Arizona
<td>258.7
<td>51
<td>.380
<td>91
<td>-40
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>Vanderbilt
<td>240.9
<td>54
<td>.352
<td>94
<td>-40
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Temple
<td>151.7
<td>78
<td>.186
<td>115
<td>-37
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Iowa St
<td>209.7
<td>61
<td>.347
<td>95
<td>-34
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>Alabama
<td>465.5
<td>7
<td>.584
<td>40
<td>-33
<tr>
<td>MtnWest
<td>UNLV
<td>159.2
<td>73
<td>.271
<td>106
<td>-33
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>South Carolina
<td>340.2
<td>25
<td>.534
<td>57
<td>-32
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Pac10
<td>UCLA
<td>332.7
<td>27
<td>.520
<td>59
<td>-32
<tr>
<td>MtnWest
<td>San Diego St
<td>191.4
<td>65
<td>.338
<td>97
<td>-32
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>Mississippi St
<td>168.1
<td>71
<td>.324
<td>101
<td>-30
<tr>
<td>SunBelt
<td>Western Kentucky
<td>116.4
<td>89
<td>.167
<td>117
<td>-28
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>Virginia
<td>394.8
<td>19
<td>.568
<td>46
<td>-27
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Colorado
<td>263.9
<td>50
<td>.440
<td>76
<td>-26
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Purdue
<td>321.2
<td>30
<td>.547
<td>53
<td>-23
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Kansas
<td>394.1
<td>20
<td>.581
<td>41
<td>-21
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Oklahoma St
<td>348.8
<td>24
<td>.573
<td>45
<td>-21
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>Arkansas
<td>329.3
<td>29
<td>.554
<td>49
<td>-20
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>UCF
<td>173.4
<td>69
<td>.392
<td>89
<td>-20
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>Tennessee
<td>484.9
<td>5
<td>.645
<td>24
<td>-19
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Penn St
<td>452.7
<td>8
<td>.635
<td>27
<td>-19
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Buffalo
<td>114.9
<td>90
<td>.264
<td>108
<td>-18
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Kansas St
<td>267.1
<td>49
<td>.500
<td>66
<td>-17
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>Tulane
<td>118.2
<td>86
<td>.314
<td>102
<td>-16
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Michigan
<td>516.1
<td>4
<td>.653
<td>19
<td>-15
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>NC State
<td>236.5
<td>55
<td>.466
<td>70
<td>-15
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Nebraska
<td>397.4
<td>18
<td>.613
<td>32
<td>-14
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Iowa
<td>422.7
<td>13
<td>.640
<td>25
<td>-12
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Pac10
<td>Washington St
<td>196.2
<td>63
<td>.444
<td>75
<td>-12
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Wisconsin
<td>478.2
<td>6
<td>.701
<td>16
<td>-10
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Eastern Michigan
<td>107.8
<td>96
<td>.271
<td>106
<td>-10
<tr>
<td>SunBelt
<td>Florida Intl
<td>101
<td>101
<td>.234
<td>111
<td>-10
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>Mississippi
<td>195.4
<td>64
<td>.458
<td>73
<td>-9
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>Rice
<td>154.4
<td>77
<td>.403
<td>86
<td>-9
<tr>
<td>WAC
<td>New Mexico St
<td>104.6
<td>99
<td>.264
<td>108
<td>-9
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>Florida
<td>554.6
<td>3
<td>.756
<td>11
<td>-8
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Northwestern
<td>236.2
<td>56
<td>.514
<td>62
<td>-6
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>UAB
<td>118.2
<td>86
<td>.366
<td>92
<td>-6
<tr>
<td class="big10orange">Big10
<td>Ohio St
<td>645.5
<td>1
<td>.816
<td>4
<td>-3
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">BigEast
<td>Connecticut
<td>306.2
<td>36
<td>.589
<td>38
<td>-2
<tr>
<td>WAC
<td>Utah St
<td>75.3
<td>111
<td>.214
<td>113
<td>-2
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Texas
<td>634.7
<td>2
<td>.857
<td>3
<td>-1
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>Auburn
<td>424.1
<td>12
<td>.724
<td>13
<td>-1
<tr>
<td>WAC
<td>Idaho
<td>72.3
<td>113
<td>.211
<td>114
<td>-1
<tr>
<td>MtnWest
<td>Wyoming
<td>128.6
<td>82
<td>.423
<td>82
<td>0
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>East Carolina
<td>144.2
<td>81
<td>.432
<td>80
<td>1
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Pac10
<td>Arizona St
<td>283.2
<td>43
<td>.581
<td>41
<td>2
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>LSU
<td>440.5
<td>9
<td>.810
<td>6
<td>3
<tr>
<td class="secpurple">SEC
<td>Georgia
<td>436.5
<td>11
<td>.782
<td>8
<td>3
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>Clemson
<td>302
<td>37
<td>.627
<td>31
<td>6
<tr>
<td>MtnWest
<td>Colorado St
<td>118
<td>88
<td>.425
<td>81
<td>7
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Kent St
<td>96.7
<td>103
<td>.343
<td>96
<td>7
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>UTEP
<td>123.4
<td>85
<td>.438
<td>77
<td>8
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Oklahoma
<td>413.8
<td>14
<td>.815
<td>5
<td>9
<tr>
<td>SunBelt
<td>North Texas
<td>89.8
<td>108
<td>.333
<td>99
<td>9
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Pac10
<td>California
<td>332.4
<td>28
<td>.675
<td>18
<td>10
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">BigEast
<td>Rutgers
<td>258.6
<td>52
<td>.581
<td>41
<td>11
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">BigEast
<td>Pittsburgh
<td>222.1
<td>58
<td>.562
<td>47
<td>11
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>Wake Forest
<td>217.2
<td>60
<td>.554
<td>49
<td>11
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>Memphis
<td>170.2
<td>70
<td>.520
<td>59
<td>11
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>Marshall
<td>113.2
<td>93
<td>.423
<td>82
<td>11
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Ohio
<td>105.4
<td>98
<td>.403
<td>86
<td>12
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Pac10
<td>USC
<td>412.1
<td>15
<td>.910
<td>1
<td>14
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>Georgia Tech
<td>267.6
<td>48
<td>.597
<td>34
<td>14
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>Miami
<td>286.9
<td>41
<td>.640
<td>25
<td>16
<tr>
<td>WAC
<td>San Jose St
<td>95.5
<td>104
<td>.400
<td>88
<td>16
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Missouri
<td>287.4
<td>40
<td>.649
<td>22
<td>18
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>Maryland
<td>220.7
<td>59
<td>.581
<td>41
<td>18
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Pac10
<td>Oregon
<td>293.4
<td>38
<td>.653
<td>19
<td>19
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Miami (OH)
<td>128.4
<td>83
<td>.507
<td>64
<td>19
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>Boston College
<td>308.4
<td>34
<td>.718
<td>14
<td>20
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>Virginia Tech
<td>307.5
<td>35
<td>.750
<td>12
<td>23
<tr>
<td class="accred">ACC
<td>Florida St
<td>277.9
<td>45
<td>.649
<td>22
<td>23
<tr>
<td class="pac10blue">Pac10
<td>Oregon St
<td>247.7
<td>53
<td>.632
<td>30
<td>23
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">BigEast
<td>Louisville
<td>287.9
<td>39
<td>.703
<td>15
<td>24
<tr>
<td>MtnWest
<td>New Mexico
<td>151.3
<td>79
<td>.541
<td>55
<td>24
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Western Michigan
<td>113.9
<td>92
<td>.486
<td>68
<td>24
<tr>
<td>SunBelt
<td>LA-Monroe
<td>43
<td>117
<td>.357
<td>93
<td>24
<tr>
<td class="big12yellow">Big12
<td>Texas Tech
<td>286
<td>42
<td>.697
<td>17
<td>25
<tr>
<td>SunBelt
<td>Middle TN St
<td>93.2
<td>107
<td>.423
<td>82
<td>25
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>Houston
<td>151.1
<td>80
<td>.553
<td>52
<td>28
<tr>
<td>SunBelt
<td>LA-Lafayette
<td>56.7
<td>116
<td>.414
<td>85
<td>31
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">BigEast
<td>South Florida
<td>165.5
<td>72
<td>.589
<td>38
<td>34
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">BigEast
<td>West Virginia
<td>280.5
<td>44
<td>.763
<td>9
<td>35
<tr>
<td class="bigeastgreen">BigEast
<td>Cincinnati
<td>176.9
<td>68
<td>.600
<td>33
<td>35
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Central Michigan
<td>112.2
<td>95
<td>.520
<td>59
<td>36
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Akron
<td>95.4
<td>105
<td>.472
<td>69
<td>36
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Ball St
<td>93.9
<td>106
<td>.466
<td>70
<td>36
<tr>
<td>SunBelt
<td>Florida Atlantic
<td>80.3
<td>110
<td>.449
<td>74
<td>36
<tr>
<td>SunBelt
<td>Arkansas St
<td>57.7
<td>115
<td>.437
<td>79
<td>36
<tr>
<td>WAC
<td>Nevada
<td>114.7
<td>91
<td>.547
<td>53
<td>38
<tr>
<td>MtnWest
<td>BYU
<td>190.6
<td>66
<td>.635
<td>27
<td>39
<tr>
<td>WAC
<td>Fresno St
<td>158.9
<td>74
<td>.597
<td>34
<td>40
<tr>
<td>WAC
<td>Louisiana Tech
<td>67.9
<td>114
<td>.466
<td>70
<td>44
<tr>
<td>MtnWest
<td>TCU
<td>208.6
<td>62
<td>.760
<td>10
<td>52
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Toledo
<td>88.5
<td>109
<td>.534
<td>57
<td>52
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Northern Illinois
<td>100.4
<td>102
<td>.554
<td>49
<td>53
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>Tulsa
<td>128.4
<td>83
<td>.633
<td>29
<td>54
<tr>
<td>WAC
<td>Hawaii
<td>155.1
<td>76
<td>.650
<td>21
<td>55
<tr>
<td>MAC
<td>Bowling Green
<td>107.8
<td>96
<td>.595
<td>37
<td>59
<tr>
<td>SunBelt
<td>Troy
<td>74
<td>112
<td>.562
<td>47
<td>65
<tr>
<td>CUSA
<td>Southern Miss
<td>103.7
<td>100
<td>.597
<td>34
<td>66
<tr>
<td>MtnWest
<td>Utah
<td>155.9
<td>75
<td>.787
<td>7
<td>68
<tr>
<td>WAC
<td>Boise St
<td>112.8
<td>94
<td>.872
<td>2
<td>92
</tbody>
</table>
Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6793424786678923623.post-78499006941568506252011-08-01T23:23:00.001-04:002011-08-01T23:25:39.626-04:00I've got a bad feeling about this<p>Pop quiz - when was the last time you can remember a college football head coach leaving his job on a truly positive note?
<p>It just doesn't happen anymore, and if it does it's extremely rare.
<p>Looking back over the last decade, since and including the 2000 season, there have been 215 head coaches who have not come back to their team the following season. That's an average of about 20 per season, or 1/6 of the FBS coaches out there. Breaking down the numbers into groups...
<p><b>Fired/Resignation = 145 (67%)</b> I'm combining these two together because often there's little difference between them when it comes to the reasons behind the coach leaving, whether it's a bad season, a scandal, or just not getting the job done. This is the biggest group, made up of more than two thirds of those 215 coaches.
<p>Those 145 had an average winning percentage in their final season of just .356, and only 30 of them were over .500. So you're dealing with a losing record and probably not making a bowl game - not a good way to keep the fan base (and administration) happy. Some of the coaches who were fired/resigned and who did have winning records were brought down by scandals, including recent ones such as Butch Davis at UNC, Bill Stewart at West Virginia, and Mike Leach at Texas Tech. (Jim Tressel at Ohio State has the distinction of being the winningest coach (12-1 last season) to be dropped by his team since 2000.) That's never fun for a fan to go through. And some winning coaches were fired for not winning enough, such as Frank Solich at Nebraska, John Cooper at Ohio State, Rich Rodriguez at Michigan, and Larry Coker at Miami. When you've got a winning tradition, sometimes even 8-4 isn't good enough to keep people happy.
<p><b>Took Better Job = 47 (22%)</b> While you might be happy for your coach when he chooses to leave and go to another team, it still hurts.
<p>The majority of these coaches ended with a winning season (41 of them), which is good in some ways because it means they were victorious at your school. It's also bad in some ways because the chances of your new coach improving that winning record right away the next year is slim. Some were fired at their new job before coaching at game (Mike Price at Alabama, Michael Haywood at Pitt, and George O'Leary at Notre Dame) and some left under a cloud with issues in their wake (Pete Carroll at USC, Rich Rodriguez at West Virginia). Others left to try out the NFL (Bobby Petrino at Louisville, Steve Spurrier at Florida, and Nick Saban at LSU). Even if a coach leaves scandal-free though, there's always the sting that your team just got rejected.
<p><b>Retired = 20 (9%)</b> Retirement in general doesn't have a lot of negatives associated with it, especially for legendary coaches. But it's not all riding off into the sunset - in fact, most of the time it's not on a very high note.
<p>Of these 20, only 7 of them had winning last seasons. The two winningest retirees ended on good notes, moving to their school's AD position (Mike Bellotti at Oregon and Barry Alvarez at Wisconsin, both 10-3 in their final season). Of the other five...
<p>...Lloyd Carr at Michigan lost 6 of 7 to Ohio State, 5 of 6 bowl games before winning his last, and to I-AA Appalachian State in his last season;
<br>...Don Nehlen at West Virginia lost 7 straight bowl games before winning his last, and had never finished better than 2nd in the Big East since winning it in 1993;
<br>...Lou Holtz at South Carolina was 5-7 in 2002 & 2003, and the last game he coached was the infamous brawl with Clemson in 2004;
<br>...Bobby Bowden at Florida State was an institution, but the Seminoles weren't able to continue their huge success of the 1990's, averaging 7.6 wins in his last five seasons mainly as the figurehead of the team;
<br>...Rich Brooks at Kentucky was never able to compete in the SEC, never finishing better than 3rd in the East in any of his seven seasons.
<p>13 other coaches retired after a .500 or worse season, including Lavell Edwards at BYU, Joe Tiller at Purdue, Fisher DeBerry at Air Force, and Bobby Johnson at Vanderbilt. Not the way neither they nor the fans wanted their tenures to end, I'm sure.
<p><b>Health Reasons = 3 (1%)</b> Not much to say about this one. Includes Urban Meyer at Florida, Randy Walker at Northwestern, and Terry Hoeppner at Indiana.
<p>Kinda depressing, isn't it? Yeah... Knowing those odds, it seems that if you like your coach and think you've got one of the greats (or even a good one), the best thing you can do is enjoy it while you can and treasure them while they're still roaming the sidelines.Ed Gunthernoreply@blogger.com1